It is starkly evident that the traditional practice of physically beating/spanking one's child lowers the IQ of that child. Numerous studies have proved this fact through extensive testing of young children. Not only this, but a 2002 analysis of 88 spanking studies spanning six decades linked spanking to 10 negative behaviors including aggression, anti-social behavior, and mental health issues.
Spanking is physical trauma that affects the brain subconsciously and inversely, and deprives most children of positive learning experiences. Childhood development psychologists such Elizabeth Gershoff (University of Austin Texas) have proven that "With spanking, a parent is delivering a punishment to get the child's attention and to get them to behave in a certain way," and therefore "it's not fostering children's independent thinking." To properly discipline a child, one must provide a positive, logical, rational learning experience, something that spanking is obviously void of.
Im not saying that every kid who got hit or spanked is going to grow up to be screwed up or have a bad relationship with their parents. But it is wring to hit a kid because your using your power an authority over them to physically harm them and they have no way to defend themselves. Why does society get inconsolably upset when someone hits their dog, but not when someone hits their kid?
I believe in positive reinforcement. This is based on psychology rather than feelings. Punishment has been proven to not work. It causes the person to obey/fear the punisher and punishment rather than learning right from wrong. If you don't get caught it's fine because you won't get punished. That's what it teaches.
Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear. -Albert Camus
If my mom decided to give me a little paddle when I was younger, it was either on the side of my leg that had a lot of meat on it (so it wouldn't hurt too much or leave a mark), my bottom (with my panties on), or on the palm of my hand. No way I'd ever spank my child on their bare bottom. It's a little far to go bare bottom, in my opinion.
My parents use to spank with anything they can reach when i misbehave.Thats like a hell and it does not teach me anything but only feel angry towards them.The anger i keep holding soon become a resentful towards them.Due this,i dont have close relationship with my parent.Since that day i moving out from their house(at that time i was 16 years old,i never met them and I dont want too because why should I try to communicate with someone who are abusing me even though they are my parent
I believe that a spanking should always administered on the child's BARE bottom (of course this should only be done in privacy!), for some reasons: the most important is that the spanking parent can see the effects of the spanking and the redness of the child's bottom. Moreover, it is helpful for a good distribution of smacks and it is the fairest way to spank because it eliminates the influence of the child's clothing completely.
On the other hand younger children shouldn't spanked with an implement, it is too dangerous to spank a 5 or 6old with an implement. At age 8-10 it is considerable to introduce an safe implement like a wooden cooking spoon, but hand spanking should still work at this age. As soon the child reaches the age of 12, the spanking with an implement should be standard. Of course they should used always carefully, the idea of spanking is not to injure the child (for this reasons belt should be avoided)!
Spanking needs to hurt or why do it? I was spanked naked with the belt, so that's how I spank my kids. They're not going to feel anything through pants and a diaper, or even just underwear. When my kids get a real spanking they never repeat the behavior again.
This is not really a yes or no question. There are simply too many variables. They include age of the child and physical condition of the parent.
Thus, while spanking a preschooler's bare bottom with a belt for coming home late from school probably constitutes abuse, paddling a teenage daughter on her bare behind with a hairbrush for sneaking out to see her boyfriend after she's been grounded might be a reasonable punishment. In fact, in one case of which I am aware, a 14-year-old daughter requested that very punishment from her mother. We had a similar experience with our 17-year-old. After being caught for shoplifting, she admitted she deserved to have her bare bottom padded!
According to a counselor with experience in dealing with predelinquent daughters and their mothers, once they realize it will actually improve their behavior, these girls prefer to go over their mother's lap for bare bottom paddlings rather than being subjected to less effective forms of alternative disciplining.
Quite often, the idea of paddling an older daughter's bare bottom is more of a problem for the mother than it is for her daughter!
Just for the record, the reason the above focused on older daughters rather than older sons arises from the fact that, after puberty, boys are more likely to treat getting spanked like the would being attached. While teenage daughters tend to remain submissive when spanked, teenage boys are more likely to rebel.
As one mother put it, regardless of their age, girls fear having their bare bottoms paddled. Nevertheless, they will drop their pants, bend over, and learn from the experience.
Because if you say that is abusing then taping someone on the arm must be abusing too. Abusing means to "treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly." And those aren't my own words, I got it from the Internet. That's not violence, that is discipline. Learn Something.
I still laugh with my friends today about my dad hitting me with the belt. I never seen it as abuse because i deserved it. It taught me a lot actually. I think excessive hitting with little to no reason can be "abuse" but spanking? Come on now. I respect my parents to this day and we laugh about the paddle with holes in it all the time.