The Instigator
HeWhoKnowsAll
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
iamnotwhoiam
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

All schools should bring back corporal punishment

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
iamnotwhoiam
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/15/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 17,405 times Debate No: 28243
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

HeWhoKnowsAll

Pro

I believe that children are rude, selfish, irritating and ignorant because they have no accountability anymore. When I went to school children respected; each other, other parents, teachers and principles. I believe that spanking and such helped keep that respect. No whiny little brats want to shoot someone when there poor little feelings get hurt because they have had no structure in school or at home. I don't believe the child should have to bend over, it pushes the spine into a vulnerable area, I don't believe the paddle should be made of a totally ridged (hard) substance and I believe only the same sex should do the spanking 1 to a maximum of 3 hits.
iamnotwhoiam

Con

My opponent believes some negative things about children, but gives no evidence that children are worse than in previous generations. He presents no evidence that lack of corporal punishment is a factor in shootings. His whole paragraph is mere hidebound opinion.

Let's look at some actual evidence. The most cited studies of spanking almost all found that spanking is detrimental to discipline:


"Among the respondents without a history of physical or sexual abuse during childhood, those who reported being slapped or spanked "often" or "sometimes" had significantly higher lifetime rates of anxiety disorders , alcohol abuse or dependence and one or more externalizing problems, compared with those who reported "never" being slapped or spanked."[1]


"The results generally indicated a linear positive association between physical punishment and child aggression.
[...]
The combination of infrequent reasoning and frequent spanking was associated with dramatically increased aggression."[2]


"The findings were consistent with a socialization model in which higher levels of severity in parental punishment practices are associated with higher levels of children's subsequent aggression toward peers. Findings indicated that children who had been spanked evidenced levels of aggression that were higher than those who had not been spanked, and children who had been the objects of violent discipline became the most aggressive of all groups.
[...]
The findings suggest that in spite of parents' goals, spanking fails to promote prosocial development and, instead, is associated with higher rates of aggression toward peers."[3]


"When parents use corporal punishment to reduce ASB [anti-social behaviour], the long-term effect tends to be the opposite. The findings suggest that if parents replace corporal punishment by nonviolent modes of discipline, it could reduce the risk of ASB among children and reduce the level of violence in American society."[4]


My opponent doesn't say why he thinks it is necessary to physically punish children rather than warn them, reason with them, remove them from the situation, or otherwise discipline them. As a parent, I never found it necessary to spank my child. I fail to see what possible benefit can be derived from an adult inflicting violence on a defenceless child. How this is supposed to make a child reasonable is not explained by proponents of corporal punishment.

I'm sure readers have seen on the streets parents losing their temper with their children and smacking them. Approval of corporal punishment gives an adult license to act out of temper.

Anyhow, my opponent has to engage with the scientific studies presented to him.






[1] http://www.cmajopen.com...
[2] http://link.springer.com...
[3] http://journals.cambridge.org...
[4] http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com...


Debate Round No. 1
HeWhoKnowsAll

Pro

I didn't expect to be criticized so quickly. I merely made a simple statement to get the ball rolling, not to present evidence. I wanted someone to accept the argument first. I did have a fact in the statement, I wrote, "No whiny little brats want to shoot someone when there poor little feelings get hurt because they have had no structure in school or at home." That is a pure and simple fact. Before the "hippie generation" there were only 3 school shootings, before 1970.
"Enoch Brown school massacre " July 26, 1764
"Poe Elementary School Attack " September 15, 1959
"University of Texas at Austin massacre " August 1, 1966
"Kent State shootings " May 4, 1970
"Avivim school bus massacre " May 8, 1970
"Jackson State killings " May 14-15, 1970
"Ma"alot massacre " May 15, 1974
"California State University " July 12, 1976
"Parkway South Junior High School shooting " January 20, 1983
"Laurie Dann " May 20, 1988
"Stockton massacre " January 17, 1989
""cole Poly technique Massacre " December 6, 1989
"University of Iowa shooting " November 1, 1991
"Concordia University massacre " August 24, 1992
"Simon"s Rock College of Bard shooting " December 14, 1992
"Richland High School shooting " 1995.
"Frontier Junior High shooting " February 2, 1996
"Dunblane massacre " Scotland, March 13, 1996
"Sanaa massacre " Yemen, March 30, 1997
"Pearl High School shooting, October 1, 1997
"Heath High School shooting, December 1, 1997
"Jonesboro massacre " March 24, 1998
"Thurston High School shooting " May 21, 1998
"Columbine High School massacre " 1999
"W. R. Myers High School shooting " April 28, 1999
"Heritage High School shooting " May 20, 1999
"Santana High School " March 5, 2001
"Appalachian School of Law shooting " 2002
"Erfurt massacre " Germany, 2002
"Monash University shooting " Australia, October 21, 2002
"Rocori High School shootings " September 24, 2003
"Southwood Middle School tragedy, 2004
"Red Lake High School massacre " March 21, 2005
"Campbell County High School " November 8, 2005
"Dawson College shooting " Canada, September 13, 2006
"Platte Canyon High School shooting " September 27, 2006
"Amish school shooting " October 2, 2006
"Weston High School shooting, September 29, 2006
"Henry Foss High School " 2007
"Beirut Arab University shooting " Lebanon, January 25, 2007
"Virginia Tech massacre " April 16, 2007
It is part of the mentality of today's youth that they are entitled things, one of those being respect. When I was a child we respected ALL adults, even the ones we didn't like. Repect was earned NOT handed out freely.
Websites will follow at the end.
Corporal Punishment as described by the Collins Dictionary and Thesaurus (in one volume - 1990) is "punishment of a physical nature such as caning". The term mainly relates to children being punished at school but can also refer to children being punished at home. As of 2008 corporal punishment has been banned in 24 countries, including Germany, Greece and the Netherlands. Nevertheless, it is still widely used by parents in their homes. In the UK, corporal punishment has been banned in schools for numerous years. However a debate is now arising as to whether the decision to ban corporal punishment in schools was the right decision and hence, whether corporal punishment should be reintroduced?

If you ask the teachers, those on the front line of disruptive students, a recurring comment is that with corporal punishment off the agenda, there are no sanctions available to teachers for the most stubborn of terrors!
1
In a survey completed by the Times Educational supplement, 6000 teachers were questioned. One in five believed that class room behaviour had deteriorated since the abolition of corporal punishment and they believed the education system would improve with the re-introduction of corporal punishment. We should adhere to the teachers requests. Coming from one of the most liberal professions, I would say 1200 teachers is a lot!!!!!!!!!! 2

It is inevitable that bad classroom behaviour will filter into life outside school. You only have to look at the crime statistics to see that crime has increased dramatically since the abolition of corporal punishment. Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime. 3

Children"s behaviour has been adversely affected by the rights culture we have in Britain. A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of "but you can't take away my freedom", "you have no right" or "I have rights". In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact. If we re-introduced corporal punishment this back chat would cease and the power would be retained by the teachers.
And detention is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. What does detention do other than waste your time? If you have ADHD or a creative mind you'll have a blast, effectively learning nothing to *correct* your behavior. If this is the only effective authority a teacher has for an out of control student then that teacher is and probably knows his/her authority is rather pitiful. 4

There is a real feeling amongst those who are bullied that telling the teacher will worsen the problem, not make it better. Victims of bullying fear repercussions. However, if there was a system of corporal punishment behind the teachers, then something could be done which would scare the bullies out of their bullying ways. This would open bully victims up as they would discuss bullying issues with teachers knowing that something definitive could be done.
If a child thinks it's okay to hit because a teacher or adult uses corporal punishment then that child is slow and fails to realize the purpose and meaning behind such an action. Besides a good and effective teacher is not going to use corporal punishment all the time, but as a last resort when all else fails. A threat is no good unless there is some fearful truth behind it.
Also, teachers are only ignorant to bullying matters because they know they cannot realistically do much to stop it. So in effect, bullying has gotten a lot meaner. 5

http://debatewise.org... 1-5
You can read the opinion of real moms on the following website.
http://www.circleofmoms.com...

I will leave you with this thought. It worked for over 7000 years. The problem is not in the spanking it is in the weak minds of our youth. Men used to go to war, come home and lead a normal life. Since the "hippie generation" they started coming back with problems. The men coming back from Afghanistan, GOD bless them, are having a real hard time mentally. I was in Rhodesia in 1981 and saw some real horrible things but my upbringing helped me to cope with the horrors I witnessed. I was paddled at least once a month from 2nd grade to 6th. That is the way they dealt with ADHD back them. I eventually got tired of being paddled and learned to calm down and do my work. I grew up fine. I raised 4 daughters and used room confinement, standing in the corner and paddling and they all turned out perfect.
iamnotwhoiam

Con

As my opponent had posted an argument in round one, albeit a cursory one, I did the same. May I suggest for future debates that my opponent state that round one is for acceptance and avoid making an argument in round one.

School shootings are obviously largely an American phenomenon. My opponent is going to have a hard time linking them to bans on school corporal punishment, for two simple reasons. One is that school corporal punishment has been banned in many countries, where school shootings are either very rare or have not even occurred at all.[1] The other reason is that there are nineteen US states where school corporal punishment has not been banned at all.[2][3][4]

I am amused that my opponent has used a debate as a source. Not only is it a secondary source, it provides rebuttals for me of any points he gleans from it.

Via my opponent's own source, in defence of corporal punishment:

In a survey completed by the Times Educational supplement, 6000 teachers were questioned. One in five believed that class room behaviour had deteriorated since the abolition of corporal punishment and they believed the education system would improve with the re-introduction of corporal punishment.[5][6]

Shrewd observers will have worked out that the large majority, four in five, believed that class room behaviour had not deteriorated and that education would not improve with the reintroduction of corporal punishment!

I suggest the minority of teachers are the ones whose methods of discipline are ineffective and need more training at the very least.

In the US, the National Association of Secondary School Principals has expressed its opposition to corporal punishment in schools.[7]

Via my opponent's source, we can see that if there is any correlation between corporal punishment and crime, it is that use of corporal punishment coincides with crime.

Of the states with the ten highest murder rates in the United States, educators paddle children in eight of them.

Of the states with the ten lowest murder rates in the US, educators paddle children in one of them.

Of the ten states with the highest percentage of the population in prison, educators paddle children in nine of them.

Of the ten states with the lowest percentage of the population in prison, educators do not paddle children in any of them.[8]

Crime in the UK (which is what my opponent is referring to with his 67% increase) has been rising since 1918. Plainly banning corporal punishment is not the reason for an upwards trend. Corporal punishment was actually banned in 1986.[9][10][11] There would then be a delay until children reached typical criminal age. Citing the crime increase since 1981 doesn't tell you anything useful.

Part of the reason crime statistics have risen sharply is an increase in the reporting of crime. The British Crime Survey showed that the number of crimes was far higher in 1981 than that recorded by the police. There were three times as many thefts, twelve times as much vandalism, three times as many sexual offences, nine times as many robberies, and twice as many burglaries as the official statistics recorded.[12]


"Children"s behaviour has been adversely affected by the rights culture we have in Britain"

Assertion not backed by evidence.

My opponent claims that corporal punishment would be effective against bullying. Is my opponent claiming that bullying is a recent phenomenon, and does not actually occur in places which still have corporal punishment?

My opponent claims that corporal punishment "worked for 7000 years." What does my opponent mean by "worked"? Does he want to hold up 5000 B.C as a glowing standard? Surely all my opponent can mean by "worked" is that the human race continued to exist. Anyhow, tradition is no reason to continue a practice. We can imagine a man in Mexico arguing for the reintroduction of human sacrifice on the basis that it was an honourable tradition.

Violence committed by adults on defenceless children is not defensible. If an adult assaults an adult in this manner it is criminal. Guards are not permitted to paddle prisoners. Why is this seen as an acceptable way of disciplining children? If we cannot treat adults in this way, if to do so is abuse, why do some think children should be so dealt with? Also, what lesson can children possibly learn from corporal punishment, except might makes right?

My opponent has failed to engage with the scientific literature that says corporal punishment achieves the opposite to its aims. If they cannot do so, everything else is moot. The debate is over. I'll add a couple of more sources for my opponent to engage with.

Research indicates that corporal punishment may adversely affect a student's self-image and his or her school achievement.[13] Research has also shown a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and increased school truancy, drop-out rates, violence, and vandalism.[14]

I note that my opponent wishes to blame the hippies for everything, but that would be another debate.




[1] http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org...
[2] http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...
[3] http://www.stophitting.com...
[4] http://abcnews.go.com...
[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
[6] http://debatewise.org...
[7] http://www.principals.org...
[8] http://www.nospank.net...
[9] http://www.guardian.co.uk...
[10] http://news.bbc.co.uk...
[11] http://moourl.com...
[12] http://www.historytoday.com...
[13] Society for Adolescent Medicine, Ad Hoc Corporal Punishment Committee. (2003). Corporal punishment in schools: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32, pp385–393.
[14] Strauss, M. A. (2000). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families and its effects on children. (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.



Debate Round No. 2
HeWhoKnowsAll

Pro

I stated it worked and stand by it. If it didn't work then why would it have continued? Why is it since the bans started children have become incorrigible and school shootings, gang rapes and other things have become more and more popular. Almost weakly we read about; rapes, gang rapes, assaults and even murder. Those things did not happen back in the 60's and 70's when I went to school and bullying was very, very rare. Although I am sure things did happen in some parts of the country it was virtually unheard of.
History - I just snagged this real quick from wikipedia.
Corporal punishment was recorded as early as c. 10th Century BC in Book of Proverbs attributed to Solomon:
He that spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes.
Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell.
It was certainly present in classical civilisations, being used in Greece, Rome, and Egypt for both judicial and educational discipline. Some states gained a reputation for using such punishments cruelly; Sparta, in particular, used them as part of a disciplinary regime designed to build willpower and physical strength. Although the Spartan example was extreme, corporal punishment was possibly the most frequent type of punishment. In the Roman Empire, the maximum penalty that a Roman citizen could receive under the law was 40 "lashes" or "strokes" with a whip applied to the back and shoulders, or with the "fasces" (similar to a birch rod, but consisting of 8"10 lengths of willow rather than birch) applied to the buttocks. Such punishments could draw blood, and were frequently inflicted in public.

I don't know why you would be amused with my using a debate. It brings into play other opinions. I have no problem sharing my sources and even encourage you to use them. This topic has been debated since the days of the first real republic Greece. Like all republics, the softer they got and they more entitlements the weaker the empire and eventual collapse. I happened in Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome, British and now the USA.
When I mentioned the 6000 teachers I guess I was wrong in believing you would understand it. I thought it was obvious and easy to understand. England is a very liberal country. They have many entitlements and have been pushing for all types of entitlement reform since the 1750's. (Don't go getting political I am using the word entitlement because the English believe they are "entitled" certain things. Politics is another subject). For a union (liberal) organization such as teachers and living in a liberal society such as England it is AMAZING that 20% of the teachers would say they think it should be brought back. The article doesn't say how may had no opinion or had a different position.

Skewing facts does not make a case. Being spanked has never been proven to cause violence when a person becomes an adult. There are a ton of psychology papers on the internet talking about this subject but they never went out, grabbed 100,000 people, sat them all down and ask who had been spanked, who has been violent and do they feel there is a connection. What they do is visit people in prison, who are always innocent and ask about their childhood and being spanked. Then they claim that spanking damaged them!!! Yelling at a child causes more mental damage than spanking.
However, a parent who calmly spanks a child after explaining why the child is being spanked and does so only to create a foundation for other primary methods of discipline (such as Time Out) is never going to develop a pattern of violence in the child. Never.
The American Academy of Pediatrics admits that spanking can stop a child from misbehaving in the short-term. Exactly. During that initial short-term period, parents should transition to Time Out to train their child to obey and respect others. Many children respond to self-controlled, reasonable spanking with an adjustment in their attitude toward parents.
http://drpaterno.blogspot.com...

Here are the states with corporal punishment still allowed, then the rank in violent crime, then the major cities in those states, and then the percentage of whites in those cities. We know violent crimes are highest in major cities, especially the inner cities. We also know that violent crimes are committed disproportionately by minorities and people who come from broken homes. The violent crime has nothing to do with spanking.
States with corporal punishment Rank Major cities % white population in city
Alabama 23 Birmingham,Montgomery 35.0 47.6
Arizona 16 Phoenix, Tucson 46.5, 47.2
Arkansas 11 Little Rock, N. Little Rock 49.4, 61.55
Colorado 25 Denver, Aurora 52.2, 61.1
Florida 4 Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa 55.1, 11.9, 46.3
Georgia 19 Atlanta, Augusta 50.7, 39.1
Idaho 42 Boise, Nampa 91.5, 83.45 ****
Indiana 29 Indianapolis 58.0
Kansas 24 Wichita, Kansas City 64.5, 40.2
Kentucky 40 Louisville, Lexington 71.7, 81.04
Louisiana 5 New Orleans, Baton Rouge 33.0, 37.8
Mississippi 31 Jackson, Gulfport 18.0, 56.86
Missouri 12 St. Louis, Kansas City 42.2, 54.9
New Mexico 9 Albuquerque, Las Cruces 42.1, 37.5 *
North Carolina 18 Charlotte, Raleigh 45.1, 53.3
Ohio 27 Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati 59.3, 33.4, 48.1
Oklahoma 17 Tulsa, Oklahoma City 57.9, 68.7
South Carolina 1 Columbia, Charleston, N. Charleston 49.6, 52.2, 40.6 **
Tennessee 2 Memphis, Nashville 29.5, 56.3,
Texas 15 Houston, San Antonio, Dallas 26.0, 26.6, 28.8 ***
Wyoming 43 Cheyenne, Casper 87.4, 92.3 ****

* http://www.newmexico-demographics.com...
** http://www.southcarolina-demographics.com...
*** Houston, San Antonio and Dallas are around 50% until the white hispanics are removed from the non hispanic.
**** These were not listed with white hispanics removed.

I see 5 in the top 10 and 3 in the bottom 10. Maine #50 is 94.4% non hispanic white. New Hampshire #48 is 92.3% and Vermont #47 is 94.3. I realize that spanking is not allowed in schools in these states but home spanking is. A liberal made a motion to ban home spanking and it was heavily defeated!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org...
iamnotwhoiam

Con

Since corporal punishment raises aggression levels in children (as established by my first round sources), and aggression is often met with aggression, it must raise aggression levels in some of the adults that care for the children. A society with raised aggression levels is more likely to have a President with raised aggression levels (especially when you consider that the President may be a parent). A President with raised aggression levels is more likely to press the red button. Therefore, a society with corporal punishment in schools is more likely to be obliterated by thermonuclear war.

My opponent asks,

"If [corporal punishment] didn't work then why would it have continued?"

If human sacrifice didn't work, why was it continued for hundreds of years?
If slavery doesn't work, why has it continued?
If astrology doesn't work, why has it continued?
If murder doesn't work, why has it continued?
If assault doesn't work, why has it continued?

My opponent not only has to establish a link between school shootings and a lack of corporal punishment, something he has thus far failed to do, but now he also has to do the same for gang rape.


"For a union (liberal) organization such as teachers and living in a liberal society such as England it is AMAZING that 20% of the teachers would say they think it should be brought back."

Is my opponent aware that the UK had a right wing government from 1979-1997 (eighteen years!), and has one again now?[1] The UK is a conservative country, and England even more so. The right wing Conservative Party received 36% of the vote in the last election, and the Labour Party 29%. Scotland and Wales are heavily weighted to Labour, so the difference in the share of the vote in England would be even higher. Teachers' unions are not party affiliated, and teachers are from across the political spectrum. My opponent cannot dismiss the opinions of the majority because he imagines he might disagree with their politics, and accept the opinions of the minority because he has a gut feeling that their politics might suit him better.


"Being spanked has never been proven to cause violence when a person becomes an adult."

Corporal punishment has been shown to increase the risk of the victim becoming a wife beater in later life.[2]

It has also been shown to lead to a lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence and externalizing problems.[3]

I also refer my opponent back to the first round sources. Spanking has been proven to cause violence in children, and that is sufficient to condemn it.

If my opponent has an issue with the methodology of any of my sources, he is welcome to tackle them individually. I trust that the readers of this debate will not give much credit to a blanket dismissal of scientific studies.


"Yelling at a child causes more mental damage than spanking."

Unwarranted assertion, but irrelevant, as I am not claiming that yelling is a useful alternative to corporal punishment.


"However, a parent who calmly spanks a child after explaining why the child is being spanked and does so only to create a foundation for other primary methods of discipline (such as Time Out) is never going to develop a pattern of violence in the child. Never"

Assertion without evidence. The scientific literature I presented in round one on spanking would suggest otherwise.


"The American Academy of Pediatrics admits that spanking can stop a child from misbehaving in the short-term."

Using a blog as a source is a bad idea. Cowing a child in the short-term does not outweigh damage done in the long term. The American Academy of Pediatrics,

"urges parents, educators, school administrators, school board members, legislators, and others to seek the legal prohibition by all states of corporal punishment in schools and to encourage the use of alternative methods of managing student behavior."[4]


My opponent is right that there are (many) other factors involved in crime. I think it will be difficult for him to show that lack of corporal punishment is responsible for an upsurge in school shootings, gang rape and assault.


My opponent does not say why it is not okay to hit other adults, including prisoners, but it is okay to hit children.

Corporal punishment has no place in a humane society. It is violence, it is psychologically damaging, and it is detrimental to society at large.



[1] http://www.thuto.org...
[2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
[3] http://www.cmajopen.com...
[4] http://moourl.com...






Debate Round No. 3
HeWhoKnowsAll

Pro

I was really hoping for a more intelligent opponent. In the first round you cut and paste a paragraph that included sexual abuse and spanking OFTEN. We are debating corporal punishment. Then you cut and paste corporal punishment to reduce anti social behavior. That is not what a school would spank for. Then you assume that I would rather spank than warn. I always talked to my children and let them know why they were being spanked just like my school did when I was little. Then you talk of parents losing temper and smacking kids on the streets, again this is about school corporal punishment. Being spanked does NOT show children they can hit others as stated below. I showed with historical fact that school shootings have increased over the last 40 years. Many schools were stopping spanking before the states changed the laws. Then you tried to make a false claim that crime is high in the 19 spanking states and low in the 31 non spanking. I showed the facts of low income inner city crime. Then you get stupid with human sacrifice, slavery, astrology, murder and assault. They believed it worked, people would rather slave than die, astrology holds truth, murder and assault are by weak minded people.

Read this
Some "experts" claim that spanking has no instructional value, teaches children aggression, is abusive, or harms children's emotional and psychological well-being . However, these are myths.

Myth: Spanking has no instructional value.
Reality: Some claim that spanking does not teach children how to behave. This is false. Suppose you spank your child for running into the street. Spanking is a punishment, and punishments stop behaviors. By spanking your child, you stop him from running into the street. So you have taught your child how to behave: you have taught him not to run into the street. But what if you spank your child for talking back. The critics would say, you teach your child not to talk back, but you have not taught her how she is supposed to talk to you. But you teach her how she is supposed to talk to you when you scold her before the spanking. Before spanking, you make sure your child understands what she did wrong and how you expect her to behave in the future. In this way, spanking does have instructional value. The critics might then ask why not just tell your child how she is to talk to you and skip the spanking. Unfortunately, telling children what to do is not always enough. Children often do not change their behavior unless the behavior has negative consequences--and spanking is a powerful negative consequence.

Myth: Spanking teaches children to be aggressive.
Reality: Some argue that if parents spank their child, the child will learn that hitting is OK, so the child will go out and hit other children. But this is absurd. I've never heard a child justify hitting another child by saying that it's OK because mom and dad hit me. What spanking teaches is that parents may swat their child on the bottom when the child misbehaves. It does not teach a child hitting another child is OK. Nor does it teach that hitting for a reason other than punishment is OK. Most children will see this. A child who is old enough to be spanked understand there are differences between him and mom and dad. Mom and dad can drive a car but he can't. Mom and Dad go to work but he goes to school. So he understands that mom and dad can do things liking spanking that he can't do. Moreover, parents can explicitly tell the child that their spanking him is different form his hitting another child.

Myth: Spanking is abusive.
Reality: Spanking is not abusive. First, abusive parents often don't love their children. They abuse their children because they regret having them, the children remind them of someone else, and so on. But for most parents, spanking is done out of love and care for the child. Second, abusive parents lash out at their children in anger, not caring if they injure the child or not. But parents that spank do not want to injure their children. Spankings are given to correct the child's behavior. Yes, spankings hurt, but they are done so as to cause no lasting damage. That is why spankings are given on the bottom, for the posterior does not contain any vital organs. Do some parents spank too hard and cause welts and bruises? Yes, and they have gone too far. They have crossed the line between punishment and abuse. But this merely shows that some parents misuse spanking, not that spanking is abusive. Properly done, spanking causes no lasting physical damage.

Myth: Studies prove that spanking harms children's emotional and psychological well-being.
Reality: Some researchers have reported correlations between receiving corporal punishment and behavioral and emotional problems later in life. However, these studies have several flaws. First, most are correlational. Correlational studies can tell us only that two things are related, but such studies do not tell us how the two things are related. Suppose we see there is a correlation between spanking and delinquency. A correlation only means that spanking and delinquency are related--it does not tell us how they are related. Correlational studies can not tell us what we really want to know: what causes what. It might be that children are delinquent because they were spanked. But it might also be that they were spanked because they were delinquent? A correlational study can not tell us which of these two possibilities is true. Therefore, such studies do not prove that spanking causes delinquency, anti-social behavior, depression or anything else because correlation studies can not prove what causes what.
Second, many of these studies looked at corporal punishment, not just at spanking. And some studies had a very "inclusive" definition of corporal punishment. They defined corporal punishment not only as hitting on the bottom but also slapping in the face, hitting on the head, boxing the ears, and shaking, among other things. Some of the forms of corporal punishment included in these studies could be considered abusive such as hitting on the head or boxing the ears. So even if we could conclude from these studies that corporal punishment causes emotional and behavior problems, and we can"t because the studies are correlational, but if we could, would it mean that all forms of corporal punishment cause emotional and behavioral problems or only the more severe, abusive forms like hitting on the head or boxing the ears? Larzelere1 found that when abusive forms of punishment were excluded from the definition of corporal punishment, researchers were more likely to find a beneficial outcome to using corporal punishment rather than a negative outcome. So abuse, not spanking, harms children"s emotional and psychological well-being.
We know that many children are spanked and turn out fine; they are not aggressive, delinquent, depressed or anti-social. Why? Simons3 found that what leads to aggression, delinquency, and poor psychological well-being is low parental involvement such as parents not loving or trusting their children, not knowing where their children go or who they are with, and not being consistent in discipline. Being spanked did not lead to aggression, delinquency, and poor psychological well-being. Parents that love their children and are involved in their lives may use spanking, but they will never use spanking in a way that harms their children.

1Larzelere, R. E. (1996). A review of the outcomes of parental use of non abusive or customary physical punishment. Pediatrics, 98(4), 824-828.
2See for example, Giles-Sims, J. et al. (1995). Child, maternal, and family characteristics associated with spanking. Family Relations,44, 170-176.
3Simons, R. L. et al . (1994). Harsh corporal punishment versus quality of parental involvement as an explanation of adolescent maladjustment. Journal of marriage and the family, 56, 591-607.
http://www.angelfire.com...
iamnotwhoiam

Con

"In the first round you cut and paste a paragraph that included sexual abuse and spanking OFTEN. We are debating corporal punishment."

As I said previously, research indicates that corporal punishment may adversely affect a student's self-image and his or her school achievement. This is a school study.[1]

Anyhow, can my opponent give a substantive difference between corporal punishment at home and corporal punishment at school, whereby the deleterious effects of corporal punishment at home somehow transmute into positive effects when delivered by a teacher?


"Then you cut and paste corporal punishment to reduce anti social behavior. That is not what a school would spank for."

Does my opponent doubt that antisocial behaviour occurs in schools, or does he think that it is not an infraction of school discipline? Or is he claiming that schools who practice corporal punishment only do so for sociable violations?


My opponent has yet to show that school shoootings and lack of corporal punishment are linked, especially bearing in the mind the two problems I pointed out that he has to overcome.


"I've never heard a child justify hitting another child by saying that it's OK because mom and dad hit me."

Unlikely that they do justify it at all. However, it has been shown that corporal punishment leads to increased aggression in children.


"Properly done, spanking causes no lasting physical damage."

The issue is psychological damage.


My opponent raises concerns about correlative studies. Studies linking smoking and lung cancer are correlative. We could argue that people who are prone to lung cancer are more likely to smoke. However, we also have a better causal mechanism that explains the link. We understand the concept of carcinogens.

It is the same for corporal punishment. There is a link between spanking and increased aggression. We could argue that children who are likely to become more aggressive are more annoying and are more likely to get spanked, but there is a body of theory that explains spanking as a causal factor.

Aside from violence being known to be a stressor, corporal punishment itself is understood to be a stressor.[2]

In a summary of scientific research, Elizabeth Gershoff explains some of the causal mechanisms:

"Social cognitive theory suggests that children who are hit by their parents (and thus physically hurt by them) will develop a tendency to make hostile attributions about others that, in turn, increase the likelihood that they will behave inappropriately in social interactions. Finally, attribution theorists argue that, because corporal punishment uses physical force, its use by parents constitutes an external source to which children can attribute their compliance; corporal punishment does not promote internalized reasons for behaving appropriately. Children who have not internalized the reasons for behaving pro-socially thus have no reason to behave appropriately when their parents are not there to provide an external reason for doing so."[3]

Of the association between behavioural and emotional difficulties,

"There is significant theoretical and empirical justification for assuming that at least some important part of this association is due to the causal impact of corporal punishment"[2]

The use of Corporal Punishment has been associated with anger, fear, and humiliation in the child. Also of concern is the issue of trust between children and adults, and the child's ability to deal with situations without resorting to violence.[4]

There is a link between corporal punishment and later wife beating. We could argue that children who are likely to beat their wives when they grow up are worse behaved than other children, but we have a body of theory that explains corporal punishment as a causal factor.

Importantly, even if causation were not established, corporal punishment is ineffective at preventing children from growing up to be wife beaters, alcoholics, depressives, and suicide risks. So what is the use of continuing the practice?


"would it mean that all forms of corporal punishment cause emotional and behavioral problems or only the more severe, abusive forms like hitting on the head or boxing the ears? "

How is one form of attack abuse and not the other? What is "acceptable" violence against defenceless children? Anyhow, several of the studies I have presented have been specifically on spanking.

Strassberg et al. (1994) found that milder forms of spanking in the home correlated with aggressive school behavior to a significant degree, and that child abuse correlated with aggressive behavior at school to an even more significant degree. Any child who had been abusively "hit" even once in their life was excluded from the "spanked" group, yet the correlation between spanking and school aggression remained significant.[5]

A 2006 review found that

"Research on the long-term effects of physical punishment are consistent, and overwhelmingly negative over a wide variety of child development outcomes."[6]

Lazelere has no case.


"Parents that love their children and are involved in their lives may use spanking, but they will never use spanking in a way that harms their children."

My opponent confuses intention with outcome. However,

"Rather than serve as a buffer, high parental support may create a context in which the child experiences incidences of physical punishment as inconsistent, confusing, and especially distressing."[2]


My opponent's hyperlink is broken.


Corporal punishmment is not more effective even in the short term than other measures.[3][7] There is no case for it at all.





[1] Society for Adolescent Medicine, Ad Hoc Corporal Punishment Committee. (2003). Corporal punishment in schools: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32, pp385–393.
[2] Turner, H., and Finkelhor, D. (1996). Corporal Punishment as a Stressor among Youth.
Journal of Marriage and the Family. 58 (1):155-166. Order (CV10)
http://www.unh.edu...
[3] http://scholarship.law.duke.edu...
[4] http://csmh.umaryland.edu...
[5] Strassberg, Z.; Dodge, K.A.; Petit, G.S. & Bates, J.E. 1994. "Spanking in the Home and Children's Subsequent Aggression Toward Kindergarten Peers." Development and Psychopathology, 6:445-461.
[6] http://www.msd.govt.nz...
[7] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Debate Round No. 4
HeWhoKnowsAll

Pro

HeWhoKnowsAll forfeited this round.
iamnotwhoiam

Con

Everyone enjoyed my Christmas dinner. I've just taken an apple pie out of the oven, so I'm finished in the kitchen now. Merry Christmas to all at DDO.
Right...

I'll start by summing up the scientific evidence.

Studies of corporal punishment show that those who are so disciplined have significantly higher lifetime rates of anxiety disorders, alcohol abuse, and one or more externalising problems. Those who are spanked are significantly more likely to become wife beaters.

Other studies show that children who are disciplined with corporal punishment are more aggressive.

These effects remain when studies discount those who have been abusively hit.

Research indicates that corporal punishment in schools can lead to students having a negative self-image, and can negatively affect school achievement. There is a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and increased truancy, drop-out rates, violence, and vandalism.

In the short term, corporal punishment has been shown to be no more effective than other methods of discipline.

Even if corporal punishment did not cause the above mentioned problems, then it would still be ineffective at preventing them. However, there is a body of evidence and theory which shows that corporal punishment is a stressor and can lead to a violent reaction. This establishes causation beyond mere correlation.

My opponent failed to show that any of the things he claimed were linked were in fact linked.

There is also the human rights issue which speaks against corporal punishment. My opponent has been unable to say why it is not okay to hit others, including prisoners, but it is okay to hit children. That is because it is not okay. Violence against children must stop.

Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by HeWhoKnowsAll 4 years ago
HeWhoKnowsAll
I had some great stuff to add for round 5 but I guess I was away too long for Christmas. Thanks for the debate but psychologists make things up to sign patients and get kick backs for prescribing drugs. No study has EVER been conducted on a large group of people on the street proving any of your "facts", they go to troubled people ask if they have been physically or mentaly abused and then make reports on what a TROUBLED person says!!! If that is a fact then I don't know what else to say. To iamnotwhoiam and all that read this site, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!!!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by YYW 4 years ago
YYW
HeWhoKnowsAlliamnotwhoiamTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: A fairly lopsided debate. PRO's arguments consisted of warrantless claims, which were as unsubstantiated in common sense as they were in evidence. PRO also forfeited a round, granting CON the conduct point. Moreover, CON's arguments were both overwhelming to PRO's... case.
Vote Placed by Bodhivaka 4 years ago
Bodhivaka
HeWhoKnowsAlliamnotwhoiamTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro repeatedly attempted to make his case with unsubstantiated anecdotal evidence, or otherwise poorly sourced arguments; Con, on the other hand, presented an impressively strong, well-substantiated and logical case. Seeing as Pro forfeited, as well as insulted Con's intelligence, Con get's conduct points. Con's sources were also more numerous and reliable; as such, he get's points for sources, as well.