New Study Slams Spanking

More proof of what we have known for
a long time, and another nail in the
coffin of a loathsome abuse of
children.
===


Study: Spanking May Cause Aggressive Behavior

POSTED: 6:48 am EDT May 3, 2004
UPDATED: 7:05 am EDT May 3, 2004

BALTIMORE -- It's a topic that's up there with religion and politics
-- spanking. Everybody has an opinion and a new study is sure to
re-ignite the debate.

The research suggests spanking before age 2 may be a risk factor for
aggressive behavior in some children.

The impact of spanking has been the topic of a number of studies --
most with mixed results. The latest research is one of the first to
look at the impact of spanking on youngsters under 2.

Dr. Eric Slade, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health: "Before age 2,
children are undergoing rapid developmental change and rapid brain
development. We thought that during this period, spanking could be
riskier than spanking older children."

Slade and his research team studied spanking in nearly 2,000 toddlers.

Slade: "Children who were spanked at least once in the previous week
were approximately twice as likely as children who were not spanked to
have behavior problems four years later that required their parents to
come to school and discuss those problems with a teacher."

The children who were spanked early in life were also more likely to
be described by their parents as having behavior problems and being
sad or depressed when they hit school age. Researchers note that the
findings only applied to white children, not African Americans or
Hispanics.

Slade: "There's speculation that in African American and Hispanic
families, where spanking was considered more culturally normative,
that spanking is less likely to have a detrimental effect for
children."

White parents that spanked frequently were also more likely to have a
lower education level, lower income and a higher rate of depression.
Slade stresses that the findings don't mean that spanking is okay for
some parents and risky for others. He says it's important for parents
to examine why they spank.

Slade: "Take home message for parents is that they should feel
comfortable in the disciplinary practices and punishments that they've
been using in their families and that they're they feel comfortable
with, but at the same time they want to be aware of the frequency with
which they are spanking their children, particularly young children."

If spanking becomes part of a routine that keeps up as kids get older,
Slade said it may be a red flag that there could be more serious
issues involved and it's time to get help.

Slade stresses that the study doesn't mean spanking is right for some
and wrong for others. He said the impact of spanking on a child's
development depends on circumstances in which it is used.

He said the events that occur before, during and after spanking --
things like a parent's tone of voice and language -- all affect the
impact of spanking. He notes that a parent's involvement and
interaction with their children on a daily basis also play a role.

The study was conducted at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of
Public Health and is published in the journal Pediatrics.
===



--
The danger to the life and well-being of children
increases in direct proportion to their proximity
to religion and its practitioners.
-Ivan Gowch

Ivan Gowch wrote:
[snip]
: The children who were spanked early in life were also more likely to
: be described by their parents as having behavior problems and being
: sad or depressed when they hit school age.

This may be because children who were spanked early in life behaved
worse and experienced more depression later on as a result. Or it might
be because children with a predisposition to oppositional behavior and
depression are spanked at earlier ages as a result of this. However, if
the latter interpretation is correct, it would also indicate that spanking
did not succeed in making these children less oppositional and less
depressed later in childhood, and that alternatives should be used which
work better than spanking.

Chris

Nice propaganda, Ivan. :-) Just typical of your spin. Why don't you
point them to the real source:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/113/5/1321

Note the part about African-American and Hispanics:
"Among children in this sample, spanking frequency before age 2 was a
substantial predictor of a child's risk for behavior problems at school
age for white non-Hispanic children only."

Also note that no one here is recommending spanking for children under
two years of age!

Slade: "Take home message for parents is that they should feel
comfortable in the disciplinary practices and punishments that they've
been using in their families and that they're they feel comfortable
with, but at the same time they want to be aware of the frequency with
which they are spanking their children, particularly young children."


Sound like common-sense approach to me.

Doan

Ivan Gowch wrote:
[snip]
: The children who were spanked early in life were also more likely to
: be described by their parents as having behavior problems and being
: sad or depressed when they hit school age.

This may be because children who were spanked early in life behaved
worse and experienced more depression later on as a result. Or it might
be because children with a predisposition to oppositional behavior and
depression are spanked at earlier ages as a result of this. However, if
the latter interpretation is correct, it would also indicate that spanking
did not succeed in making these children less oppositional and less
depressed later in childhood, and that alternatives should be used which
work better than spanking.

Chris

Which alternatives would that be, Chris? Which alternative has stood the
same statistical scrutiny when compared to spanking under the same
conditions? Shall we look at Straus & Muradian (1998)? :-)

Doan

Ivan Gowch wrote:

The impact of spanking has been the topic of a number of studies --
most with mixed results. The latest research is one of the first to
look at the impact of spanking on youngsters under 2.

I'm referring to the 1986 study by Power and Chapieski, "Childrearing
and Impulse Control in Toddlers: A Naturalistic Investigation." Most
disturbing are two conclusions: "...infants of physically punishing
mothers showed the lowest levels of compliance and were most likely to
manipulate breakable objects during observations...." and "...infants
whose mothers relied on physical punishment showed lower Bayley scores
at 21 months, especially for the nonverbal items." (Power and
Chapieski, 1989, p. 273).

No matter how much research is conducted, results are always the same.
Spanking is a risk factor in children's lives. Spanking correlates with
short and long term negative outcomes. There is no logical or moral
reason to spank a child of any age.

LaVonne

Power, T. & Chapieski, M. (1986) Childrearing and impulse control in
toddlers: A naturalistic investigation. Developmental Psychology,
22(2), 271-275.

Doan wrote:

Ivan Gowch wrote:
[snip]
: The children who were spanked early in life were also more likely to
: be described by their parents as having behavior problems and being
: sad or depressed when they hit school age.

This may be because children who were spanked early in life behaved
worse and experienced more depression later on as a result. Or it might
be because children with a predisposition to oppositional behavior and
depression are spanked at earlier ages as a result of this. However, if
the latter interpretation is correct, it would also indicate that spanking
did not succeed in making these children less oppositional and less
depressed later in childhood, and that alternatives should be used which
work better than spanking.

Chris


Which alternatives would that be, Chris?

The alternatives used by parents of children who were not spanked early
in life, doan. Do you read? Children in this study who were not
spanked early in life were less likely to be described by their parents
as having behavior problems and being sad or depressed when they hit
school age. What do you think those parents who didn't spank were doing?
They were using alternatives.

Good grief, doan.

LaVonne

Doan wrote:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/113/5/1321

Note the part about African-American and Hispanics:
"Among children in this sample, spanking frequency before age 2 was a
substantial predictor of a child's risk for behavior problems at school
age for white non-Hispanic children only."

So all children who are not "white non-Hispanic" deserve to be hit due
to their ethnicity?

Also note that no one here is recommending spanking for children under
two years of age!

Baloney. The great "Dr. Dobson" has been touted on the ng for years.
He recommends spanking children as soon as they show signs of defiance,
which he states is around 18 months of age. My limited understanding of
math leads me to conclude that children under 18 months of age are less
than two years old.

LaVonne

Carlson LaVonne wrote in message ...
Doan wrote:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/113/5/1321

Note the part about African-American and Hispanics:
"Among children in this sample, spanking frequency before age 2 was a
substantial predictor of a child's risk for behavior problems at school
age for white non-Hispanic children only."

So all children who are not "white non-Hispanic" deserve to be hit due
to their ethnicity?

Also note that no one here is recommending spanking for children under
two years of age!

Baloney. The great "Dr. Dobson" has been touted on the ng for years.
He recommends spanking children as soon as they show signs of defiance,
which he states is around 18 months of age. My limited understanding of
math leads me to conclude that children under 18 months of age are less
than two years old.

It's called a "brain fart" LaVonne. Whenever Droany is caught these
days in a logic corner of his own making he suddenly loses all
connection to reality and is likely to spout just about anything.

You watched an old Plant go through it's little changes in that
direction over the years. Droany is younger so is taking longer. But
it's happening. The brain can handle just so much lying to itself and
it starts to slowly break down.

We've seen this with folks like Observer, Neal, and more quickly with
folks whose names escape me because their stays here were so short.
Some ran because they had to to survive.....logic and truth were
killing them.

And some stay for a time. Notice how little posting The Plant can
manage at all these days.

Notice the levels of absurdity that the Droananator has sunk to in
recent years.

LaVonne

Kane

Doan wrote in message ...
Nice propaganda, Ivan. :-) Just typical of your spin. Why don't you
point them to the real source:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/113/5/1321

And what would it tell them?

Note the part about African-American and Hispanics:
"Among children in this sample, spanking frequency before age 2 was a
substantial predictor of a child's risk for behavior problems at school
age for white non-Hispanic children only."

Nice propaganda, Droaner. Just typical of your spin. Why don't you
tell them what the article actually said about this issue? That both
cultures have a norm of more spanking thus the children aren't likely
to see it as out of the ordinary?

In other words, the children are conditioned to accept assault as
normal.

Also note that no one here is recommending spanking for children under
two years of age!

You might be a bit more accurate if you said "no one at present is."
But you yourself have cited Dobson...who does advocate spanking
children under two.

And among the Christian fundy spankers that have shown up here from
time to time the Pearls have been mentioned and they teach "child
training" on their web sites and in their publications for children as
youngs 9 months old, by using hitting of the child.

You are really deteriorating Droany, ever since I asked you to answer
the long time claim that parents know best how to use spanking for
discipline.

So what IS the asnwer to The Question, Droaner...or are we going to
get more of that appeal to nonsense, "resonable standards?"

Slade: "Take home message for parents is that they should feel
comfortable in the disciplinary practices and punishments that they've
been using in their families and that they're they feel comfortable
with, but at the same time they want to be aware of the frequency with
which they are spanking their children, particularly young children."


Sound like common-sense approach to me.

Sounds like a sensible commentator that understands the incapacity of
those who surrender to the illogic of hitting children under the
banner of spanking discipline to hear the truth....that they are
assaulting tiny undeveloped human beings...children.

If someone was caught doing to puppies what is done to children, at
time still legally in this country, they would be charged with cruelty
to animals.

Do you find that "common-sense" as in logical and truthful?

That statement in no way detracted from the message in the study that
the use of CP has desasterous outcomes for the individual and
humanity...but instead of dealing with that...you, as spanking
compulsives, and especially those that were victims of spanking, alway
do...went to some irrelevant part of the commentary and focused AWAY
FROM THE CENTRAL ISSUE.

Doan

Spanking a child is hitting a child, Droaner. Hitting a child is pain,
Droaner. Pain is a poor teacher of the lesson desired, Droany. Pain
causes reactions, Droaner.

And life long emotional crippling. Thinking errors being the most
common, Droananator.

So what IS the Answer to The Question, Droan? "reasonable standards"
is a classic thinking error, Doan.

Kane

On Tue, 4 May 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote:



Ivan Gowch wrote:

The impact of spanking has been the topic of a number of studies --
most with mixed results. The latest research is one of the first to
look at the impact of spanking on youngsters under 2.

I'm referring to the 1986 study by Power and Chapieski, "Childrearing
and Impulse Control in Toddlers: A Naturalistic Investigation." Most
disturbing are two conclusions: "...infants of physically punishing
mothers showed the lowest levels of compliance and were most likely to
manipulate breakable objects during observations...." and "...infants
whose mothers relied on physical punishment showed lower Bayley scores
at 21 months, especially for the nonverbal items." (Power and
Chapieski, 1989, p. 273).

No matter how much research is conducted, results are always the same.
Spanking is a risk factor in children's lives. Spanking correlates with
short and long term negative outcomes. There is no logical or moral
reason to spank a child of any age.

Can you show me one study where correlations are different with regard to
non-cp alternatives under the same conditions?

"Perhaps the most difficult methodological problem in research on the
effects of CP is posed by the the fact that child behavior problems lead
parents to spank. Thus the repeated finding that the more CP parents use,
the worse the behavior problems of the child does not necessarily show
that CP has harmful effects, or even that CP is not effective in reducing
misbehavior (as I erroneously argued in the past)."

Straus admitted his error. Can you do the same?

Doan