Unfortunately, I do not think your argument holds weight either. If we
entertain the possibility that some of the spanking behavior could be
elicited by children who have not responded to other forms of treatment,
then if it is only effective in some instances, the outcomes of the spanked
group could be worse than the non-spanked group, but still better than they
would have been without spanking. In the extreme, a drug that cures 10
percent of a group
of terminal patients would be seen as ineffective (lethal) if the "control"
group is people who did not take the drug. Try using your logic if the
results had turned out the other way
Michael Quanty
Psychology Professor
CBMTS Project Director
Thomas Nelson Community College
P.O. Box 9407
Hampton, Virginia 23670
Voice: 757.825.3500
Fax: 757.825.3807
-----Original Message-----
From: Hatcher, Joe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 9:59 PM
To: TIPS
Subject: RE: Spanking
Hi Folks,
I've done some thinking about this, and like Stephen, I don't think
that one should read the data as causal; this is correlational stuff no
matter how well collected. However, I think one can use the following
argument: data that indicates that children who were spanked have more
negative outcomes at least argues that spanking does not do any *good*. I
think the burden here is on the ones who advocate causing physical pain to
children as a corrective measure to demonstrate that this is effective
beyond other means. If spanking (or hitting our children, to put it another
way) does no good, then we shouldn't do it, the same way we would not give
our children medicine that did no good.
Joe
Joe W. Hatcher, Jr., Ph.D.
Department of Psychology
Ripon College
Ripon, WI 54971
USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ----------
> From: Stephen Black
> Reply To: Stephen Black
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 7:45 PM
> To: TIPS
> Subject: Spanking
>
> On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Sandra Price wrote:
>
> > >From Mr. Jones' Psych in the New for this week.
> >
> > Canadian study links spanking to psychiatric disorders
> > http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/991005/bbx.html
> > (Yahoo News, October 5) Children spanked by their parents are twice
> > as likely to develop drug and alcohol problems in adulthood,
> > according to a Canadian study released on Tuesday. The study found
> > that those who were spanked or slapped had increased rates of
> > anxiety disorders, anti-social behavior and depression.
>
> Well, I've always been a card-carrying bleeding-heart liberal on the
> topic of spanking. My credentials: my two children survived childhood
> without experiencing anything more traumatic than the occasional
> time-out or loss of privileges, and were never spanked or slapped at
> any time. I've also toed the party line in class, emphasizing how
> physical punishment produces undesirable side-effects and models
> violence.
>
> But (here it comes, Martha) lately I've been questioning the adequacy
> of the demonstrations of the harmful effects of physical punishment on
> behaviour. Possibly I've been sensitized by Judith Rich Harris's point
> that most (all?) of these studies are flawed by a failure to consider
> that a genetic explanation is equally likely. Certainly, all the
> studies I've seen which claim dire outcomes for spanking have this
> flaw.
>
> Take the above example, which undoubtedly leads people to conclude
> that spanking causes children to grow up to be drug addicts,
> alcoholics, and criminals. The author of the study, Harriet MacMillan,
> herself is quoted as saying "She hopes her findings will
> encourage parents to avoid spanking as a disciplinary tool". And a
> lawyer is quoted in the news item as saying "The study reinforces what
> parents need to hear--spanking is not good for children".
>
> But the study shows nothing of the kind. It only shows a relation
> between parents who spank and kids who turn out bad. It could be that
> parents who have, say, genes disposing to aggression, pass them on to
> their kids. The genes make the parents prone to spank, they make the
> kids prone to go bad. Or perhaps the kids inherit out-of-control
> tendencies which make the parents feel the need to use harsher
> discipline. In that case, it's their bad tendencies which leads to
> more spanking (and later poor outcomes), not the reverse.
>
> BTW, the study was apparently retrospective, asking adults to report
> on their level of physical punishment many years earlier. There's
> further reason to be cautious here. It may well be that messed-up
> adults feel more need to blame someone, and so remember higher levels
> of physical punishment as children.
>
> Once again, where's the 2 x 2 table? We need to know not only how many
> spanked kids go wrong, but how many non-spanked go wrong as well. We
> also need to know how many non-spanked still go wrong anyway. We also
> know from recent twin studies that shared family experiences count
> for surprisingly little in the socialization of children. We may not
> like that conclusion (my students sure don't) but that's what the
> evidence shows.
>
> I might add that I am still in no way an advocate of physical
> punishment. I find it morally unacceptable to hit kids, there are
> effective alternatives, and hitting them sure doesn't make them like
> you any better. But whether it causes lasting harm is another
> question.
>
> -Stephen
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stephen Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
> Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661
> Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Lennoxville, QC
> J1M 1Z7
> Canada Department web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
> Check out TIPS listserv for teachers of psychology at:
> http://www.frostburg.edu/dept/psyc/southerly/tips/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
