We had a whack (pun intended) at this discussion previously,
and I see I contributed on or around October 11 last year, but
who's going to look it up? So here I go again.
Much of what is said about the issue of spanking is really based
on moral/ethical grounds (and sometimes religious), but when we
try to justify our position, we often cite science in support.
There's an obvious risk that we only cite the science that
supports what we want to believe.
I discuss spanking each year in my course in child psychology. I
used to argue in class that research supported the view that
spanking was ineffective, harmful, tended to promote aggression
("the cycle of violence"), and that better methods of control of
child behaviour were available. This is the standard view, well
represented in textbooks of child psychology.
I've since become aware that the research that supports this
position is much weaker than I thought, and the case against
spanking is, in actuality, poorly-supported. So, I now caution my
students that claims that scientific studies oppose the use of
spanking should be viewed with caution. I'm uncomfortable doing
this because personally I think that hitting kids, for whatever
reason, sucks, and I hate to be identified with the pro-spanking
movement. But it's a good test of my willingness to be guided in
class by evidence, not personal belief. I think it may be the
other way around in most textbooks of child psychology.
One weakness is that most findings are correlational. A typical
one is that parents who spank have children who are more
aggressive, or have other bad outcomes. This may be caused by the
spanking. But discussion of these results usually fail to
consider equally plausible alternative hypotheses, such as
genetic transmission (aggressive parents pass aggressive genes to
their children), and reactive effects (aggressive kids trigger
more punishment by their parents; that is, aggression breeds
spanking, not the reverse).
Another point is that studies showing harmful effects of
punishment often use the "divide-and conquer" method (identified
by Judith Harris in her book _The Nurture Assumption_). That is,
if they fail to show a direct effect between spanked and
unspanked, they divide by age, by sex, by socio-economic
status, by type of spanking, by whether admistered by mother or
father, until at last a difference appears. This may sound
far-fetched, but only to those who haven't actually examined the
primary literature on this topic.
Finally, the anti-spanking movement has a worthy opponent in
Robert Larzelere and his colleagues. They've provided some
powerful critiques of the issue, available on-line at:
http://people.biola.edu/faculty/paulp/
I don't know anything about Larzelere, affiliated with _Father
Flanagan's BoysTown USA_, whatever that is, but he's good! One of
his more provocative analyses, for example (Larzelere & Johnson,
1999) reports that before Sweden enacted its famous anti-spanking
law, the rate of child abuse there was much lower than in the
USA. After it was passed, the rate became much higher than in the
US. This certainly doesn't suggest that this well-meaning law
was achieving its aim.
BTW, I recall that the issue which started this thread was the
posting of a report that a Canadian court upheld the validity of
Canada's (criminal code, chapter 51 section 43) pro-spanking
legislation. According to this section:
"Every schoolteacher, parent, or person standing in the place of
a parent is justified in using force by way of correction toward
a pupil or child, as the case may be, who is under his care, if
the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the
circumstances".
The anti-spanking movement is trying to have this section
repealed and replaced with a prohibition against spanking, a la
Sweden. They cite the scientific literature in support (but not
Larzelere!).
A few years ago an American tourist was arrested in Ontario for
spanking his 5-year-old daughter in public (someone saw it and
called the cops). But the court dismissed the case on the grounds
that the punishment was reasonable under the circumstances. But
what's reasonable? One of my students asked her parent, who just
happened to be a family court judge. The answer was:
-when the aim is disciplinary
-when only the hand is used
What is unreasonable includes:
-using an instrument, such as a belt or stick
-hitting with a closed fist
-acting out of anger
-causing injury
So if you're going to paddle your kid in public in Canada, be
warned!
-Stephen
Reference
Larzelere, R., & Johnson, B. (1999). Evaluations of the effects
of Sweden's spanking ban on physical child abuse rates: a
literature review. Psychological Reports, 85, 381--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
