If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Researchers admit spanking behavior not rigorously tested
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...,DRMN_38_20851
59,00.html Beal: A lot of parents are still conflicted about spanking. Hulbert: So it seems. The American Academy of Pediatrics says you shouldn't spank. But a quite significant proportion of its pediatrics membership says that it tells parents it is on occasion perfectly okay to spank. Dip into advice books and you'll find experts either categorically denouncing the practice, defending parents' right to resort to it, or hedging their bets. Meanwhile, many parents say they don't feel spanking is the best disciplinary approach by any means, while many nonetheless confess that they have indeed been known to spank their children. So there you have it, yet another hotly contested ideological issue that turns out, on a practical level, to be more about muddle than high principle. It's worth noting that scientific efforts to resolve the spanking debate have been, as researchers have lately admitted, far from rigorous. ********************************** Ms. Hulbert has written a book on the history of child raising trends and fads in the United States. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior not rigorouslytested
What you fail to realize is that most pediatricians are not experts in child
development. Pediatricians are experts in child medicine. Spanking is not a virus and spanking is not a bacteria. Spanking is not a syndrome nor is it a medical condition. The vast majority of pediatricians are trained in child medicine, not in child development. These are individuals who treat children with medical conditions and who research medical issues. The exception is a developmental pediatrician. Child psychologists, child psychiatrists, and individuals trained in child development and early education are the experts on spanking. These are the individuals who understand development and who understand the potentially devastating effect this commonly-used parenting strategy can have on young children. These are the individuals who treat children suffering from emotional problems, who educate young children, and who conduct research on children's development -- including what is most conducive to short and long term positive outcomes. These are the individuals who have researched spanking. The vast majority of these individuals denounce the barbaric practice of raising your hand, with or without an implement, and striking your child's body in a futile attempt to parent. If your child is ill or has a medical condition, consult a pediatrician. If your child is suffering from emotional issues or if you have non-medical questions regarding your child's development, consult a specialist in child development. LaVonne Fern5827 wrote: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...,DRMN_38_20851 59,00.html Beal: A lot of parents are still conflicted about spanking. Hulbert: So it seems. The American Academy of Pediatrics says you shouldn't spank. But a quite significant proportion of its pediatrics membership says that it tells parents it is on occasion perfectly okay to spank. Dip into advice books and you'll find experts either categorically denouncing the practice, defending parents' right to resort to it, or hedging their bets. Meanwhile, many parents say they don't feel spanking is the best disciplinary approach by any means, while many nonetheless confess that they have indeed been known to spank their children. So there you have it, yet another hotly contested ideological issue that turns out, on a practical level, to be more about muddle than high principle. It's worth noting that scientific efforts to resolve the spanking debate have been, as researchers have lately admitted, far from rigorous. ********************************** Ms. Hulbert has written a book on the history of child raising trends and fads in the United States. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior not rigorously tested
LaVonne Carlson wrote:
: What you fail to realize is that most pediatricians are not experts in child : development. Pediatricians are experts in child medicine. Spanking is not a : virus and spanking is not a bacteria. Spanking is not a syndrome nor is it a : medical condition. The vast majority of pediatricians are trained in child : medicine, not in child development. These are individuals who treat children with : medical conditions and who research medical issues. The exception is a : developmental pediatrician. This is correct. Parents often view their family pediatrician as a kind of oracle with regard to all matters relating to parenting. But pediatricians are child doctors by training. A pediatrician in training who goes into his or her residency as a prospanker will likely come out a prospanker and one who goes in as an antispanker will likely come out an antispanker because there is little in the training of a pediatrician to influence them to change their minds one way or the other. For what it is worth, though, the professional organization of Pediatricians in the USA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, has officially taken a stand against all forms of spanking since 1998, after the publication of Straus et al. (1997) and Gunnoe & Mariner (1997). These two teams of researchers, each starting with quite different views on spanking, both independently reached the same conclusions. The more the children in each study were spanked at the outset of the study, the more their age adjusted antisocial behavior scores were found to have increased years later. The two papers were published side by side in a pediatrics journal. Pediatricians who favor spanking are hence taking a position at odds with the position of their own professional organization. Chris REFERENCES Gunnoe, M.L. & Mariner, C.L. 1997. "Toward a Developmental-Contextual Model of the effects of Parental Spanking on Children's Aggression." _Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine_ 151:768-775. Straus, M.A.; Sugarman, D.B. and Giles-Sims, J. 1997. "Corporal Punishment by Parents and Subsequent Anti-Social Behavior of Children" _Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine_ 151(8):761-767. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior notrigorously tested
On 9 Jul 2003, Chris wrote:
LaVonne Carlson wrote: : What you fail to realize is that most pediatricians are not experts in child : development. Pediatricians are experts in child medicine. Spanking is not a : virus and spanking is not a bacteria. Spanking is not a syndrome nor is it a : medical condition. The vast majority of pediatricians are trained in child : medicine, not in child development. These are individuals who treat children with : medical conditions and who research medical issues. The exception is a : developmental pediatrician. This is correct. Parents often view their family pediatrician as a kind of oracle with regard to all matters relating to parenting. But pediatricians are child doctors by training. A pediatrician in training who goes into his or her residency as a prospanker will likely come out a prospanker and one who goes in as an antispanker will likely come out an antispanker because there is little in the training of a pediatrician to influence them to change their minds one way or the other. LOL! Pediatricians are human being, they have experienced spanking as children. Many are also parents, they deal with their kids just as any other parents. Parents ARE THE REAL EXPERTS! Thus, many pediatricians don't buy into the anti-spanking agenda, they have seen the research and they know that the research are full of holes! For what it is worth, though, the professional organization of Pediatricians in the USA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, has officially taken a stand against all forms of spanking since 1998, after the publication of Straus et al. (1997) and Gunnoe & Mariner (1997). Huh? So now they are experts???? :-) BTW, these two studies were already presented at conferences on the issue of spanking way back in 1996. The AAP reached the consensus in 1996 differently back then. The 1998 reversion was more of a political correct move - not based on any scientific evidence! These two teams of researchers, each starting with quite different views on spanking, both independently reached the same conclusions. The more the children in each study were spanked at the outset of the study, the more their age adjusted antisocial behavior scores were found to have increased years later. The two papers were published side by side in a pediatrics journal. A complete lie. They reached opposite conclusions. Pediatricians who favor spanking are hence taking a position at odds with the position of their own professional organization. So what? They showed that they can think for themselves instead of being a sheep and blindly follow what is PC at the moment. Chris REFERENCES Chris likes to cite references hoping many don't read them. I read them so Chris afraid to debate me! ;-) Here is why: Gunnoe, M.L. & Mariner, C.L. 1997. "Toward a Developmental-Contextual Model of the effects of Parental Spanking on Children's Aggression." _Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine_ 151:768-775. Title: Spanking and Children's Aggression... [Abstract, August Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1997;151:768-775] (c) AMA 1997 Toward a Developmental-Contextual Model of the Effects of Parental Spanking on Children's Aggression (Marjorie Lindner Gunnoe, PhD; Carrie Lea Mariner, MA ) Objective: --------- To challenge the application of an unqualified social learning model to the study of spanking, positing instead a developmental-contextual model in which the effects of spanking depend on the meaning children ascribe to spanking. Design: ------ Population-based survey data from 1112 children aged 4 to 11 years in the National Survey of Families and Households. Controlled for several family and child factors including children's baseline aggression. Main Outcome Measures: --------------------- Schoolyard fights and antisocial scores on the Behavior Problems Index at the 5-year follow-up. Results: ------- Structural equation modeling yielded main effects (P =.05, change in chi square) of children's age and race; spanking predicted fewer fights for children aged 4 to 7 years and for children who are black and more fights for children aged 8 to 11 years and for children who are white. Regression analyses within subgroups yielded no evidence that spanking fostered aggression in children younger than 6 years and supported claims of increased aggression for only 1 subgroup: 8- to 11-year-old white boys in single-mother families (P =.05, F test). Conclusions: ----------- For most children, claims that spanking teaches aggression seem unfounded. Other preventive effects and harmful effects of spanking may occur depending on the child and the family context. Further efforts to identify moderators of the effects of spanking on children's adjustment are necessary. (Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1997;151:768-775) Straus, M.A.; Sugarman, D.B. and Giles-Sims, J. 1997. "Corporal Punishment by Parents and Subsequent Anti-Social Behavior of Children" _Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine_ 151(8):761-767. The problen with this study is the "zero-group" contained children who were spanked less than once a week (56% of the data!!!). Straus had to admit: "We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose parents spank, but do so only infrequently. Although that is a plausible interpretation, data from another study enable us to investigate this issue by classifying spanking as "never" or "not in the past 6 months," or the frequency of corporal punishment (CP) in the previous 6 months.[1] " [1] -This is the Straus & Mouradian (1998) study, which we now know that non-cp alternatives showed even a stronger correlation to antisocial behavior than spanking! Doan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior notrigorously tested
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
What you fail to realize is that most pediatricians are not experts in child development. Pediatricians are experts in child medicine. Spanking is not a virus and spanking is not a bacteria. Spanking is not a syndrome nor is it a medical condition. The vast majority of pediatricians are trained in child medicine, not in child development. These are individuals who treat children with medical conditions and who research medical issues. The exception is a developmental pediatrician. And we know that pediatricians were never children nor are they parents, right, LaVonne? Parents are the real experts!!! They have been raising children since the beginning of time, LaVonne! :-) Child psychologists, child psychiatrists, and individuals trained in child development and early education are the experts on spanking. These are the individuals who understand development and who understand the potentially devastating effect this commonly-used parenting strategy can have on young children. These are the individuals who treat children suffering from emotional problems, who educate young children, and who conduct research on children's development -- including what is most conducive to short and long term positive outcomes. These are the individuals who have researched spanking. The vast majority of these individuals denounce the barbaric practice of raising your hand, with or without an implement, and striking your child's body in a futile attempt to parent. Really? So we are to believe Dobson, who has a Ph.D. in Child Development and had written many books on the subject??? Or are we to believe in Straus from UNH, who has a Ph.D. in Sociology??? ;-) If your child is ill or has a medical condition, consult a pediatrician. If your child is suffering from emotional issues or if you have non-medical questions regarding your child's development, consult a specialist in child development. How about Dr. Diana Baumrind? NO! She knows nothing about child development, right, LaVonne? ;-) Doan PS. Here is the summary of Dr. Baumrind study on spanking. Unlike, Chris Dugan, I really do want you to read these studies. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GO TO THE LIBRARY! ;-) "Recourse to some physical punishment was normative in the FSP sample, despite the liberal politics of the Berkeley community, and the high educational level and social status of the parents. Although by Time 3 when the children were 14 and 15, 62% of parents used no physical punishment, only 4% of the parents had never used physical punishment at Time 1, when the children were preschoolers, and only 16% had never used physical punishment between Time 1 and Time 2 when the children were ages 8 and 9. There was a considerable range of frequency and severity of use of physical punishment by the FSP parents, with a small minority, between 4% and 7%, at each time period resorting to NON-normative, although not legally abusive, physical punishment. The analysis that were intended to refer to child outcomes associated with normative physical punishment excluded those parents." And "In fact, at T1 the reverse tended to be true. At T1, the 5 children in the Green Zone who never experienced physical punishment tended to be somewhat LESS well-adjusted then those other (six) chidlren in the Green zone who experienced occasional but infrequent physical punishment, although contrasts were typically not statistically significant." To Summarize These Results: -------------------------- "Prior to removing the few parents whose use of physical punishment was unusually severe for this population and controlling the methodological artifacts that could account for the associations, frequency of physical punishment was associated with detrimental child outcomes, as antispanking advocates such as Straus claim." However, once the Red zone families were removed, there were few significant associations left to explain between child outcomes and dimensional or categorical measures of NORMATIVE physical punishment. Furthermore, the correlations with detrimental child outcomes of physical punishment did not exceed those of verbal punishment. When alternative explanations, including the adolescents' self-reported favorable perception of their parents, are considered, there are NO effects of NORMATIVE PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT on child or adolescent outcomes. The apparent effects of NPP are explained by baseline child misbehavior and third variables that contribute to a pattern of rejection and overcontrol in which reliance on physical punishment is embedded. The 3 children (all girls) of parents who totally abstainted from spanking at all time points, were not more competent by adolescence than the whose parents spanked occasionally. All were prosocial but two were very low on self-assertiveness and the one who was self-assertive and achievement-oriented manifested severe internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Unexpectedly, even the presence of above-average frequency of normative physical punishment represented by the Orange zone did not attenuate at all the positive outcomes associated with Authoritative or Democratic parenting. Thus we found no evidence for unique detrimental effects of normative physical punishment. To my knowledge this is the only study using high quality data in a prospective longitudinal design to assess the effects of normative physical punishment, after controlling ofr the following methodological artifacts: shared source variance, the intervention selection bias introduced by baseline child misbehavior, and plausible thir parenting variables that were associated with both frequency of use of normative physical punishment and detrimental child outcomes. This is one of the few studies to contrast the effects of normative physical punishment with another aversive disciplinary intervention, and to contrast the effects of "no spanking" with those "low frequency" spanking. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior not rigorously tested
Doan wrote in message ...
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote: What you fail to realize is that most pediatricians are not experts in child development. Pediatricians are experts in child medicine. Spanking is not a virus and spanking is not a bacteria. Spanking is not a syndrome nor is it a medical condition. The vast majority of pediatricians are trained in child medicine, not in child development. These are individuals who treat children with medical conditions and who research medical issues. The exception is a developmental pediatrician. And we know that pediatricians were never children nor are they parents, right, LaVonne? Parents are the real experts!!! They have been raising children since the beginning of time, LaVonne! :-) Adn I'll put my parents who don't spank up against yours who do in the arena of expert anytime. Parents who don't spank tend to look to other means, exploring a far wider range of parenting and discipline methods. Their repertoires are much larger than spankers as a rule. It would seem, since it was voted on by pediatricians, that far more, whether they were spanked as children or not, decided against spanking than for it. Makes yah kind of crasy to think of that, don't it now? r r r r Child psychologists, child psychiatrists, and individuals trained in child development and early education are the experts on spanking. These are the individuals who understand development and who understand the potentially devastating effect this commonly-used parenting strategy can have on young children. These are the individuals who treat children suffering from emotional problems, who educate young children, and who conduct research on children's development -- including what is most conducive to short and long term positive outcomes. These are the individuals who have researched spanking. The vast majority of these individuals denounce the barbaric practice of raising your hand, with or without an implement, and striking your child's body in a futile attempt to parent. Really? So we are to believe Dobson, who has a Ph.D. in Child Development and had written many books on the subject??? Most teen age boys beat off a great deal. That doesn't make them Sexologists, now does it? Dobson is a violent vicious piece of human scum that thinks that dogs and children should be equated and he even mistreats dogs. He assumes evil in children from the get go and behaves accordingly, and of course produces what he predicts. He misnames and misunderstands basic principles of child development and what the tasks for children actually are. He interprets their focus on trying to find out how the universe works as a personal attack on himself and mounts a war against the child. But you love him, of course. Or are we to believe in Straus from UNH, who has a Ph.D. in Sociology??? ;-) Of course. Someone with a degree in child development hasn't necessarily conducted any research beyond winning his Doctorate. And sociology is almost entirely a research focused discipline. Not so with child development. If your child is ill or has a medical condition, consult a pediatrician. If your child is suffering from emotional issues or if you have non-medical questions regarding your child's development, consult a specialist in child development. How about Dr. Diana Baumrind? NO! She knows nothing about child development, right, LaVonne? ;-) In fact Dr. Baumrind is a darling of the prospanking set with a long and lurid history of very strange "research" studies. There are many who do not agree with your assessment of her "studies" http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...=Google+Search The very "study" you refer to that she presented at a Berkeley gathering of psychologists is a case in point. A remarkably small study group, stripped of children who fell in what she called "the red zone" that in effect removed children that WOULD have very likely shown the results she didn't want, and NOT ever academically published so as to avoid the rigors of peer review. And you cite it like it was a valid and academically recognized study. It was nothing of the sort. You just pointed out to us, once again, the levels you will stoop to to try and declare yourself in an argument you lost years ago. Doan PS. Here is the summary of Dr. Baumrind study on spanking. Unlike, Chris Dugan, I really do want you to read these studies. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GO TO THE LIBRARY! ;-) I've read her "study" which consisted entirely of remarks she made at the conference about it. It isn't a true study at all. It was a presentation that completely avoided any chance she could be challenged on her methodology as she submitted NOTHING to peer review. We don't know if she actually even did the study she describes. "Recourse to some physical punishment was normative in the FSP sample, despite the liberal politics of the Berkeley community, and the high educational level and social status of the parents. Although by Time 3 when the children were 14 and 15, 62% of parents used no physical punishment, only 4% of the parents had never used physical punishment at Time 1, when the children were preschoolers, and only 16% had never used physical punishment between Time 1 and Time 2 when the children were ages 8 and 9. There was a considerable range of frequency and severity of use of physical punishment by the FSP parents, with a small minority, between 4% and 7%, at each time period resorting to NON-normative, although not legally abusive, physical punishment. The analysis that were intended to refer to child outcomes associated with normative physical punishment excluded those parents." r r r r ... read it carefully. She stripped the group, forming a study group she wanted for an outcome predetermined by her and the spank happy set she slavishly cowtows to. And "In fact, at T1 the reverse tended to be true. At T1, the 5 children in the Green Zone who never experienced physical punishment tended to be somewhat LESS well-adjusted And by what criteria is she determining "well adjusted"? Most spanking proponents also strongly support obedience over normal developmental exploritory behaviors. In other words, dimbulb, spankers as a whole tend to have developmentally crippled children, one way or another. You are a fine example yourself. She uses the language as carelessly as you do to try and prove your position. You and she fail miserably. then those other (six) chidlren in the Green zone who experienced occasional but infrequent physical punishment, although contrasts were typically not statistically significant." I believe the entire group consisted of less than 20 individuals studied. She addressed a crowd of extremely polite people who no doubt did their gaffawing in the halls of UC during a break to spare her the embarrassment such a "study" would bring to academics. To Summarize These Results: -------------------------- "Prior to removing the few parents whose use of physical punishment was unusually severe And we have absolutely NO way of knowing how that group was profiled to remove. Just how severe did they spank, or not? Since the public, and even pediatricians and academics don't agree on what does and doesn't rise to the level of abuse and will call spanking everything from a tap on the butt that wouldn't displace a kitten, to beatings that draw blood using objects, this is a very foolish thing for her to do. for this population and controlling the methodological artifacts that could account for the associations, frequency of physical punishment was associated with detrimental child outcomes, as antispanking advocates such as Straus claim." This is unheard of in academic circles. It was a public insult to a man in the audience, a highly respected researcher in his own right, who was rigorous enough to point out in assessing his own work any possible questionable conclusions. However, once the Red zone families were removed, Yes, if I remove all the stinging ants in a mix, then I can prove that ants don't sting by examining only the remaining. there were few significant associations left to explain between child outcomes and dimensional or categorical measures of NORMATIVE physical punishment. And define "NORMATIVE physical punishment" please, won't you Doan? Furthermore, the correlations with detrimental child outcomes of physical punishment did not exceed those of verbal punishment. Which simply proves, if true, that verbal punishment of children by their trusted parent or caregiver is very painful for a child. On the other hand entertain this thought: What would consist of a "verbal punishment"? Just what would a parent have to say to punish a child? And why? Her focus on "punishment" as "discipline" is highly revealing. One is not the other. For any study of "discipline" to be valid it has to consider this issue. She did not. Neither do you. When alternative explanations, including the adolescents' self-reported favorable perception of their parents, are considered, there are NO effects of NORMATIVE PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT on child or adolescent outcomes. Now there's a study for you. No blind. Just self-reporting. Don'tchajustloveit? That is the cardinal sin in research, to rely on self reporting by the subjects. And the fact they were adolescents probably escaped you. Years of likely the same treatment dulls the child to the pain. The apparent effects of NPP are explained by baseline child misbehavior and third variables that contribute to a pattern of rejection and overcontrol in which reliance on physical punishment is embedded. And what is "baseline child misbehavior" to the advocates of spanking? I've never had the slightest trouble taking those same behaviors of a child, and without punishment of any kind, using them for a teaching opportunity for the child. The 3 children (all girls) of parents who totally abstainted from spanking at all time points, were not more competent by adolescence than the whose parents spanked occasionally. Adolescent girls are by socialization, cooperative with their peers. Hence they inhabit a milieu of sameness...or haven't you noticed? All were prosocial but two were very low on self-assertiveness and the one who was self-assertive and achievement-oriented manifested severe internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Now what does that gobbledygook mean? It could very well mean that socialization was more a factor than "spanking" or not spanking. It could also mean that the more mentally healthy child in the group was the last child. Those who consider "compliance" by children as the measure of their competence are asking for trouble when the child is older. And so is society. Unexpectedly, even the presence of above-average frequency of normative physical punishment represented by the Orange zone did not attenuate at all the positive outcomes associated with Authoritative or Democratic parenting. Thus we found no evidence for unique detrimental effects of normative physical punishment. Which demonstrates that attempts to control for variables is unsuccessful. It could be, and she points it out above, that OTHER factors might account for the differences. And we have that bugaboo of "normative physical punishment" again. What is it? In one society it may be one thing and in another society you might have to beat your child half to death to be using "normative physical punishment." To my knowledge this is the only study using high quality data in a prospective longitudinal design to assess the effects of normative physical punishment, after controlling ofr the following methodological artifacts: shared source variance, the intervention selection bias introduced by baseline child misbehavior, and plausible thir parenting variables that were associated with both frequency of use of normative physical punishment and detrimental child outcomes. This is one of the few studies to contrast the effects of normative physical punishment with another aversive disciplinary intervention, and to contrast the effects of "no spanking" with those "low frequency" spanking. Bull****. It had less than 20 subjects drawn from a tiny pool of subjects. It is not "one of the few studies" but in fact the only "study" of it's kind ever produced and ranks right up there with Dr. Dobson the Dachsund Disciplinarian for usefullness. It was a yak fest to feed the pro spank defenders and their hysterical agenda. But I'm sure you'll insist you won another round in the ongoing pro vs anti spanking debate. Tah, Kane |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior not rigorously tested
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Parenting Without Punishing" | Chris | General | 328 | July 1st 04 05:59 AM |
Debate on spanking | Doan | General | 0 | June 12th 04 08:30 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior notrigorously tested | Doan | General | 0 | July 10th 03 06:21 AM |