The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
3 Points

Corporal punishment in the families!!!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/22/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 613 times Debate No: 49711
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Spank yes, abuse no Proper discipline is in no way abuse, and can be essential in properly raising a child. How many times have you been in a store and seen the child of someone who believes in modern parenting (no spanking, timeouts, etc) talking back to their parent, ignoring everything they say, and in general just being a spoiled little brat? There's a reason for that.


There was a time when hitting children over the head with metal implements was seen as ‘proper discipline’, while today we understandable that this is an abusive act.

While I've seen children acting out in public, most of their parents have simply reacted to their actions with threats of them being spanked if they don't behave, proving how in effective spanking is because it didn't stop the child misbehaving in the first place. Most people I’ve seen use it only because they have poor parenting skills. This is no reason to hit a child.
Children do not have to be threatened by their parents to get them to behave

Corporal punishment blurs the line between 'abuse' and 'discipline' and allows people to justify injuring their children. It also breaches children's right to equal protection under the law.

Debate Round No. 1


Why is it today it is an abusive act while not that long ago you could of been whacked across the head very easily and that was the least they could do. Kids now a days think that it is OK to talk back and disrespect there elders or parents. That is why are society is so corrupt.

Second Point:- There is a difference. There is a clear difference between clearly abusing your child and disciplining them. Discipline should involve a punishment backed by love, not an action taken out of anger. If you are hitting a child out of anger you are not disciplining them. Children do not learn from things like time outs, because there is nothing to associate to with misbehavior. Corporal punishment offers a quick stimulus that helps the developing brain associate misbehavior with pain.
I was spanked as a child, not abused, spanked. I'm am thankful every time I think about it that my parents disciplined me properly. It has made me know how to act in public. Whenever we would be in a restaurant as kids, there would be screaming children all around, and my brother and I would be the ones sitting at the table eating our food.
Again, I will clarify. Corporal punishment is done out of love and is solely for discipline of misbehavior. Child abuse is an act of aggression done out of anger meant to actually harm the child. There is a difference.


Today striking a child over the head is classed as abusive because it can lead to detrimental physical, psychological and congestive impacts which can be lifelong. I should have presented this point more clearly This point wasn’t supposed to sound as if I thought abuse was the same as corporal punishment. It was meant to read that definitions of ‘corporal punishment’ in the past contrast with our modern views of what acceptable methods of punishment were (e.g. hitting your wife for ‘disobeying you’. Okay in the eighteen hundreds, illegal today).

The definition of corporal punishment is “ a means of discipline that relies on fear and submissiveness.” or more broadly as ‘… a wide range of parenting practices intended to cause physical pain. These include such acts as pinching, shaking, slapping, punching and kicking children, and, with or without the use of objects like belts, cords and brushes, spanking, hitting and beating children…’ these definitions mention nothing about the perpetration’s emotions at the time of the corporal punishment, or them having to ‘back it with love’. Your point goes against corporal punishment, not for it because some people use it while they are angry or frustrated at a child for the child’s actions so feel they should be disciplined. This definition doesn’t include anything saying that parents can’t be angry when they physically discipline children.

Child abuse isn’t always deliberate or taken out of anger, passive emotion child abuse being a prominent example of this. I know this because I’ve spoken with child councillors from a national child abuse charity in person (as part of a project on child abuse). In my experience, parents who do use corporal punishment do so out of anger, not love. Besides, loving someone doesn’t stop it from being abuse; perpetrators of domestic abuse sometimes believe they love their victims so are a prime example of this.

The link between corporal punishments in children and an improvement their long term behaviour has never been made. In fact, a recent study has shown the opposite.

While all children can act out in public, my parents never used any form of corporal punishment on me, this hasn’t made me a bad person. It also never made us act out in public. In my childhood, I knew children whose parents used corporal punishment on them but behaved worse than me in public.

The negative impacts of corporal punishment overweight the potential benefits of corporal punishment in children.

There have been many studies which show that the negative effects of corporal punishment on children which disagree with your views. Notably, children who experienced parental corporal punishment are more likely to have antisocial behaviour and anxiety/depression than other children. The results of these studies are robust. Additionally, they have showed that children who experienced corporal punishment, similarly to those expeienced by child abuse victims.
This impacts were outlined by Gershoff (sources in comments).

Debate Round No. 2


Spanking Has Its Place I believe many would argue that spanking a child is a form of corporal punishment and it should be regarded as child abuse, but there is also a whole other group that supports spankings and they say it works. I've tried to use spanking with my child and I found it didn't work and I didn't prefer that method, but I don't see it as child abuse either. Of course, when parents over do it, or spank particularly hard, or hit children in inappropriate ways, then of course it is child abuse.


In conclusion. allowing Corporal punishment against children is discriminatory against them because of their age as it denies them equal protection under the law. It can also subject them to cruel and demining treatment which violent their rights.

I believe that it has no place in society as it can be detrimental to children for all the reasons outlined in my sources by:

  • Causing low self esteem
  • Making children feel lonely, abandoned or sad
  • Teaching them to be victims
  • Interfering with the emotional, intellectual and sensory learning process
  • Increasing the risk of poor mental health in later life
  • Teaches that violence is an acceptable way of dealing with violence

There are less violent methods of parenting which are more effective such as positive reinforcement for disciplining children. Additionally, counties which have banned it such as Sweden which made banned it have experienced no negative effects from banning it, therefore there is no reason not to if it protects both children and society.

Why should it be okay to hit a vulnerable child, when if the same was done to an adult you could be charged for assault?
I would like to thank 19acolvin for proposing such an interesting subject for this debate.

Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by AdamKG 2 years ago
Darn, I was too late to post my vote on this debate. I side with pro as her argument was more convincing, thought-out, and sourced.
Posted by BblackkBbirdd 2 years ago
I ran out of characters so couldn't add sources, including the last part of my argument for part 2:
... The results of these studies are robust. Additionally, they have showed that children who experienced corporal punishment, similarly to child abuse victims face:
Instead rates of violent behaviours in violent behaviour in later life: on children.

Increased risk of developing mental health issues in later life:

Increased rates of antisocial behaviour:

Summary of all impacts - Gershoff examined hundreds of studies on physical punishment and its outcomes both in adolescence and adulthood. She found child physical punishment is:
Associated with the quality of a parent-child relationship
Aggression (in child and adulthood)
Delinquent and anti-social behaviour
Criminal behaviour (adults), including abusing spouses and children
Poor mental health

Additional studies on corporal punishment on children (in schools). I feel these studies are still relevant as they show the effects of corporal punishment on children:
Academic effects- a study by the University of Toronto has shown children who experience corporcorporal are significantly worse in tasks involving "executive functioning" such as abstract thinking and planning than children who experience milder disciplinary methods.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Geogeer 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were better flushed out. Pro attempted to cite studies (without actually citing the study) and tried for an objective viewpoint. Con was opinion based without any appeal to corroborating sources or philosophies.