@Glitter Golgotha-
The problem with relying solely on personal experience is that it is by definition nothing more than anecdotal evidence. As such problems that arise from depending on such a source are your physical limitations. That is you are limited in how much you are capable of witnessing. Not only will it be limited in terms of sample size, but it will also quite likely be limited in terms of demographics. Obviously this will raise questions about how representative it is. The other problem is you may lack the appropriate intellectual tools required to analyze the situation effectively. I do not mean this in a derogative way. But rather you might simply lack access to the theoretical and methodological tools for embarking in such an endeavor.
As for myself, I live in a country which has banned use of physical force for corrective purposes. Something which I am greatly in support of. It is essentially an issue over whether or not children are to be perceived as having person-hood or not.
A report from UNICEF identified 7 reasons why such a ban is beneficial to the rights and well being of the child. I have quoted the seven reasons, although I would advise reading the report as it goes into more detail.
Quote:
Reason 1
Hitting children leaves them feeling hurt and confused.
Reason 2
Hitting children is a breach of their human rights.
Reason 3
Hitting children does them harm.
Reason 4
Hitting children can lead to injury.
Reason 5
The ‘rod’ is not for hitting, but for guiding and comforting.
Reason 6
Hitting conflicts with the essential goals of raising children.
Reason 7
Hitting is not necessary to control children’s behaviour.
|
Although as methods of raising children are by and large culturally defined, it can be quite worthwhile to get the perspective of someone who is trained in cross cultural studies. I turn now to an anthropologist
whose findings point out physical discipline is detrimental. This is particularly important as some people would argue that it is simply a matter of culture. This is what he had to say on whether we should turn a blind eye to cultural use of physical discipline.
Quote:
First, the data don’t suggest that spanking is a good thing. Rather, they suggest that spanking kids may be less harmful in certain cultural settings.
Second, as many people have pointed out, spanking children may teach kids that violence is an acceptable way to solve problems. Even conditional spanking raises this objection. And there is anthropological evidence in support of the idea that physical punishment trains people to accept higher levels of societal aggression.
In a cross-cultural study of 186 different societies, Jennifer Lansford and Kenneth Dodge found that corporal punishment was more common in societies that endorse violence and engage in frequent warfare (Lansford and Dodge 2008).
Similar work by Carol and Melvin Ember reveals links between corporal punishment and political inequality (Ember and Ember 2005). In their world review of nonindustrial societies, the Embers found that frequent corporal punishment of children is more common in societies with high levels of social stratification and/or low levels of democracy. In other words, corporal punishment is more common where people live under restrictive, authoritarian rule.
|