The rest of your post really isn't really worth commenting on, to be entirely honest. It's the same old ignorant rambling that's been going on throughout this thread and the first thread on this topic. But I would like to point this bit out:

Originally Posted by Faulkner

If you were really that damaged by a spanking then you're either confusing a beating with a tap to the buttocks or you're a pansy. In which case I can't help you.

Thank you for this, as it perfectly exemplifies the mindset of those who support hitting children: no one matters but them, and those like them. Children don't matter -- their feelings are seen as something that should only be taken into consideration once the adults are completely happy. The people who were traumatized by their "guardians" as a result of socially-accepted and supported abuse don't matter -- as you said, they're obviously just "pansies", they shouldn't have let it affect them. No, you only matter if you're an adult who either likes beating kids, or is okay with other people beating kids. Otherwise, your experiences and your firsthand knowledge and your research and your thoughts are worthless.

This is the exact reason such people should not be allowed to determine what does and does not constitute "abuse". You can't empathize with the potential victims if you don't care about them to begin with.

Spanking is not abuse. I have never met anyone who was traumatized by being spanked, it was ruled by the courts in my district that it is legal and harmless because it is not damaging and I don't think if you were spanked as a child you were a "victim". What about being confined to one's room for a period of weeks? Is being locked up psychological abuse? I maintain that spanking is not abuse. What's insulting is that you feel that losing an arm or being raped is equivalent to corporeal punishment. It is not the same concept, don't be so dramatic.

Just because you haven't met anyone who was traumatized doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just because you've never met a slave doesn't mean they don't still exist. You don't know what kind of experiences the people here have been through as children, so I suggest you stop saying such insensitive things before someone blows up at the ignorant things you're saying.

I didn't say that losing an arm or being raped is equivalent, or anywhere near to similar to corporal punishment. You should carefully re-read my posts and stop putting words in my mouth.

Additionally, just because it was ruled in one country to be "legal" does not mean that it is harmless. Additionally, 24 other countries have already determined that it is assault, and that number has been rising every year. It's abuse, and those countries recognize not only that, but that spanking is not a long-term parenting strategy. Over 90 studies have concluded that the long term results of spanking are more likely to be the opposite of the intent.

Unless you can provide peer-reviewed studies showing that spanking is conclusively not abuse, your anecdotal evidence of, "Oh well I don't know anybody affected, you're just wimps!" has no legs to stand on.

Here you are a link to an article in support of spanking.

In Defense of Spanking: Why Spanking is Needed

So because some people feel that it's assault I should agree with them? I don't think so.

That is one opinion article. I have a meta-study of 90 peer-reviewed independent studies from around the globe with real facts and evidence. Feel free to try again. I asked you for evidence, not an opinion from someone whom you agree with.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

Spanking is not abuse. I have never met anyone who was traumatized by being spanked, it was ruled by the courts in my district that it is legal and harmless because it is not damaging and I don't think if you were spanked as a child you were a "victim".

Unless you're in one of the 24 countries that has outlawed it. Physical violence is not traumatizing because of the physical pain caused or the physical damage done, it is traumatizing because someone has taken your right to bodily integrity away from you, completely violated it, and you were not able to stop them.

What about being confined to one's room for a period of weeks? Is being locked up psychological abuse? I maintain that spanking is not abuse.

Again, that same nonsensical argument. "A isn't as bad as B, therefore A isn't bad!" I know if I use the word "stupid" I'm going to get reported, but I can't think of any other word for this kind of logic. Yes, that's psychological abuse, but hey, it's nothing compared to starvation. And starvation is nothing compared to being set on fire. Therefore, we should allow starvation as a form of punishment!

What's insulting is that you feel that losing an arm or being raped is equivalent to corporeal punishment. It is not the same concept, don't be so dramatic.

I could say that that's quite obviously never been said or that you're making a vain, half-hearted attempt at poisoning the well, but it would essentially be like talking to a brick wall and I'm not going to waste my time on someone who outright fucking insults, flames even (were I on better terms with the moderators, I could easily have reported you for that "pansies" comment as it was a pointless flame of members of this forum) victims, people who have been traumatized and if anything need more support and sympathy and doesn't see a thing wrong with it.

Good Parent: Articles: Spare the Rod


There are just as many studies out there that support spanking and the fact that is is legal in so many places should indicate that whether it is or isn't abuse is a matter of opinion. It is my opinion that is it not abuse. It is only illegal in 24 out of 195 countries in the world, there for 171 countries do not consider it abuse. Because this is a controversial issue there is no set in stone answer to the question of "is spanking abuse" I am forced to follow my own judgments to determine the answer for my self and after reflecting on my experiences and the experiences of others I do not feel that it is abuse.

At one point in time, slavery was only illegal in a few places. Owning women was only illegal in a few places. Public executions were only illegal in a few places. Torture (either in attempt to coerce, such as during investigations, or as a ritualized practice, such as foot-binding) was only illegal in a few places. Discrimination based on race was only illegal in a few places. All it shows is that we are behind the curve.

Furthermore, your opinion does not change the fact that you are physically harming a child. If it is really not abusive, then it wouldn't be banned in foster homes, or by day care facilities, or in schools. If it is really not abusive, then it would be legal to do to adults!

Spanking is not slavery. It is a form of discipline. Not a from of imprisonment or ownership. Secondly children are not adults one should not compare adult situations to discipline administered by parents. Although it is not legal to spank an adult if an adult breaks the law they are punished and even at times physically subdued by police officers. Punishment is supposed to deter inappropriate behavior and that is what spanking is, punishment. It's supposed to be unpleasant.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

Spanking is not slavery. It is a form of discipline. Not a from of imprisonment or ownership.

I am not entirely sure how you can assert it does not equate to claiming ownership over their body. If as you are asserting, the person has no ownership over them, where do they draw the right to violate their rights to person-hood?

Originally Posted by Faulkner

Secondly children are not adults one should not compare adult situations to discipline administered by parents.

You are correct. One group is seen as having their human rights recognized, the other is not.

Edit:

Here is one of the rights which is being violated with corporal punishment, taken from the UNICEF rights of the child.

Originally Posted by Article 19

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.

2. Such protective measures should, as appropriate, include effective procedures for the establishment of social programmes to provide necessary support for the child and for those who have the care of the child, as well as for other forms of prevention and for identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and follow-up of instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for judicial involvement.

Parent's are responsible for seeing to their children's behavior. Spanking is not what I would consider doing injury to a child as the duration of a spanking is brief and no marks are left. Again I bring up the point of physical discipline. A child knowingly breaks a rule, ignores all warnings to desist and gets spanked. I see nothing wrong with this. While adults do not get spanked they do get punished for crimes and if necessary physically subdued with tasers or nightsticks. I am not against using physical punishment on anyone child, or adult if it is necessary to control the situation. Rights are all well and good but there should be a level of control. Laws and rules need to be upheld if society is to function.

You are misrepresenting the discussion. At no point is this a debate on whether we should physically discipline the child, or do nothing at all. There are numerous different disciplinary methods which a legal guardian can take which do not involve violating the human rights of the child.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

Spanking is not what I would consider doing injury to a child as the duration of a spanking is brief and no marks are left.

This is not always the case. This ideal fabrication of yours is simply not true in all, or even most, cases.

Again I bring up the point of physical discipline. A child knowingly breaks a rule, ignores all warnings to desist and gets spanked. I see nothing wrong with this.

Again, you are fabricating ideal situations. This is not always the case.

Originally Posted by Unicef Study

The confusion and sense of unfairness:
You can’t have a say when they are angry and hitting you. It’s too late for that. (9 year old boy)

Sometimes they just hit you and you don’t have a clue why. (12 year old boy)

Parents should help you understand; sometimes I don’t know why I get a smack. (5 year old girl)

Most kids get smacked for hurting someone like kicking your brother or sister. (9 year old boy)

Probably you did it by accident and it looked like you did it on purpose and they smacked you and it was wrong to smack. (7 year old girl)

Source. Real discipline focuses on the cause of the behavior and communicates a situation and its consequences clearly. Spanking does not do this.

Rights are all well and good but there should be a level of control. Laws and rules need to be upheld if society is to function.

I agree. That's why we have things like due process. And who is to say that corporal punishment is the only method of controlling a child? Are parents really so incapable that physical overpowerment is the only thing that they can use to discipline children?

I am in no way suggesting that the appropriate alternative to spanking is doing nothing. I vehemently disagree with any insinuation that this is the case. There are plenty of alternatives to physical discipline.

I do not consider spanking a violation of human rights. I do not even consider it an inappropriate form of punishment. Also If a spanking endures for a long period of time and leaves busing or swelling that's not a spanking it's a beating. There is a difference. Spanking as I know it is used as a last resort, not a first strike, when warnings and loss of privileges do not work. It is also not sever enough to merit abuse charges.

A slap to the face is not spanking

using an object such as a belt is not spanking

leaving lasting pain and discomfort is not spanking.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

I do not consider spanking a violation of human rights. I do not even consider it an inappropriate form of punishment. Also If a spanking endures for a long period of time and leaves busing or swelling that's not a spanking it's a beating. There is a difference. Spanking as I know it is used as a last resort, not a first strike, when warnings and loss of privileges do not work. It is also not sever enough to merit abuse charges.

A slap to the face is not spanking

using an object such as a belt is not spanking

leaving lasting pain and discomfort is not spanking.

Yes, well, it's too bad that slapping the face, using instruments such as belts or spoons, and leaving lasting pain and discomfort are legal in this country. Because they are all considered spanking, even if you don't think so.

You seem to live in this fantasy bubble where parents never cross the line, never harm their children, and never leave physical or emotional pain. If you allow spanking, you allow all of those things to happen. You can't just say, "Oh, well you're allowed to do it as long as it doesn't hurt," because parent's cannot know if they are hurting a child in every case. They can only know until it's too late; when a child is covered with welts and bruises and is bleeding. Parents often punish their children when they are angry, and cannot control themselves, without bothering to let themselves or their children calm down first to properly go over the situation. By opening up this door, you expose children to a risk of unacceptable physical abuse.

Originally Posted by Unicef Study

Their observations of adults:
Grown-ups grow out of the habit and if they still have the habit they don’t smack each other, instead they smack children. (7 year old girl)

I think they feel a bit sort of sorry, but they don’t want to say, but they do. (7 year old girl)

Some parents are so stressed out that they build everything up inside them and then use their children as punch bags – they need to stop doing that and get help instead of taking it out on their children. (14 year old girl)

Depending like sometimes they like deliberately want to hurt you. (12 year old girl)

Adults hit in anger. They may not mean to hurt the child but they do. (13 year old girl)

There are several alternatives to spanking that do not involve a risk to a child's well-being. There is no reason whatsoever that spanking should be the preferred method, when it is clearly a violation of a child's right to be free from bodily harm.

I did say that spanking and beating are two different things. Spanking is the act of slapping on the buttocks and, in most circumstances, does not cause physical damage beyond a light sting. If a child has been hit to the point of leaving bruises or welts then they have been beaten not spanked and the parents may be arrested on charges of abuse. I did not say it wasn't supposed to hurt. The idea is that is should sting, that's why it is utilized at all. It should not cause lasting physical damage. I said it should be a last resort.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

I do not consider spanking a violation of human rights.

The problem here is that when we turn to the rights of the child we find that it is very clearly an action which contradicts said rights. Henceforth it is a violation of their rights. Even if we rely upon the UDHR, we find that people have a right to person-hood. Again this is being violated when you spank a child. Furthermore if it is not violating their rights, why is it we can not spank adults?

1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

I do not even consider it an inappropriate form of punishment.

Not only do several psychological papers question that, but cross cultural studies do as well.

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.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

Spanking is the act of slapping on the buttocks and, in most circumstances, does not cause physical damage beyond a light sting.

Exactly. There are cases where it clearly does more than that. Is that silent minority not worth protecting? Are children really that worthless in your eyes, that they do not deserve the same freedom from physical harm that adults are afforded?

If a child has been hit to the point of leaving bruises or welts then they have been beaten not spanked and the parents may be arrested on charges of abuse.

So as long as the parent doesn't leave marks, it's okay? I think you'd be surprised at the amount of pain you can cause someone without leaving marks.

I did not say it wasn't supposed to hurt. The idea is that is should sting, that's why it is utilized at all. It should not cause lasting physical damage. I said it should be a last resort.

What should doesn't change what is. And the fact that you think it's okay to hurt a child is further evidence that it is abuse. Sting is a euphemism for hurt. Spanking is a euphemism for beating. There is no difference between beating and spanking. You can beat a child without leaving any visible marks. And you can spank a child and leave marks. They are one in the same thing. Your arbitrary definition of "it's spanking because it's on the rump" is irrelevant to what the actual laws state. No state makes a distinction between hitting on the buttocks to hitting any other area, including the stomach, arms, knees, legs, or hands. By current law, even a slap on the hand is considered a spank. Whatever your personal definition of spanking is, is irrelevant, because that is not how it is defined by law.

And again. Just because it SHOULD not cause lasting physical damage doesn't mean it DOESN'T. Just because you think spanking SHOULD be a last resort doesn't mean it IS.

Originally Posted by Crimson Fang

The problem here is that when we turn to the rights of the child we find that it is very clearly an action which contradicts said rights. Henceforth it is a violation of their rights. Even if we rely upon the UDHR, we find that people have a right to person-hood. Again this is being violated when you spank a child. Furthermore if it is not violating their rights, why is it we can not spank adults?

While we do not spank adults if they break the law and resist arrest the police can subdue then physically and even shoot them. Even in the world of adults physical actions are taken. Similarly when a child is spanked they are being physically subdued. Adults are the responsibility of the law and children are the responsibility of their parents, again I stress that physical methods should be used as last resorts but not excluded from the list of options.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

While we do not spank adults if they break the law and resist arrest the police can subdue then physically and even shoot them. Even in the world of adults physical actions are taken. Similarly when a child is spanked they are being physically subdued. Adults are the responsibility of the law and children are the responsibility of their parents, again I stress that physical methods should be used as last resorts but not excluded from the list of options.

1) I thought spanking was punishment? Subduction is not punishment. Punishment is not subduction. You can physically subdue a child without spanking, and without harming.

2) No, it's not legal to shoot someone for resisting arrest. That's a very quick way to lose your badge, especially if the resistor is unarmed.

3) JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE A LAST RESORT DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS. There are thousands of children who are not beaten as a last resort, but as a knee-jerk reaction. As long as spanking is not legally considered assault, this will continue to happen.

Yes spanking is a punishment and it is a deterrent for behavior. Similarly imprisonment , fines and community service are punishments. Punishments are not violations of human rights.

You are right about the shooting bit that was my mistake.

As for people being beaten (spanking and beating are not considered one and the same) as a knee jerk reaction well that's unfortunate, but it does not change the fact that spanking is an effective form of discipline and in some cases the only deterrent. For the thousands of parents that abuse the spanking law there are just as many who utilize it correctly. The law rules that there is a difference between spanking and abuse. Punishment is not a violation of human rights and I am inclined to agree with the law as I have seen no damage done from a simple spanking. On the subject of one's power over another the same can be said of parent's who ground their children by stripping their rooms down to four walls and a bed and keeping them confined for weeks on end. This is legal even so it can be psychologically damaging to be treated like a convict. All forms of punishment can be twisted to a degree which they can be considered abusive or extreme.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

While we do not spank adults if they break the law and resist arrest the police can subdue then physically and even shoot them. Even in the world of adults physical actions are taken. Similarly when a child is spanked they are being physically subdued. Adults are the responsibility of the law and children are the responsibility of their parents, again I stress that physical methods should be used as last resorts but not excluded from the list of options.

The problem is you are still framing it around a mindset which is dependent on the child not having ownership over their body. There is an important reason why they are referred to as legal guardians as opposed to legal owners. Their role is the guardianship of the child. Included in this is the protection of their rights. Yes, you are right that in other areas people have their rights violated. In some countries we have, and still see, acts of genocide being committed by armed forces. Are you going to cite that as reasoning for why we should be able to deprive children of their rights?

Also I have never said I am opposed to physical means for preventive purposes. I am quite in support of the law as it stands in my country. Physical means for corrective purposes is illegal, however it is legal for preventive purposes.

Edit:

Originally Posted by Faulkner

Punishment is not a violation of human rights

Do I really need to post article 19 from the rights of the child again? Surely you must be familiar with it by now.

Originally Posted by Faulkner

On the subject of one's power over another the same can be said of parent's who ground their children by stripping their rooms down to four walls and a bed and keeping them confined for weeks on end.

Who in this thread do you believe is arguing in favour of such treatment? This also falls foul of article 19.

My point with that last comment was to show that all forms of punishment can be turned into abuse. Spanking, chastising (which can quickly become criticizing and verbal abuse) loss of privileges and grounding can be and are often misused in some way or another by someone. This does not mean they should be considered initially abusive.

Although I have already provided a source which looked at the question of perspective. As someone who is quite interested in sociocultural anthropology, I would agree with you that it is important to explore issues of cultural perspective. However even when we take into account cultural differences we are still left with this, from the anthropologist I quoted earlier.

Does this mean we shouldn’t worry about culturally-sanctioned spanking?

I don’t think so.
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.

While I do not refute that your article makes a valid case other researchers have found evidence to support the opposite.
Is spanking children OK? Calvin College professor's research shows adults who remember being spanked are more well-adjusted | MLive.com

the fact is that this is still a matter of controversy indicates that there is no globally established right or wrong answer yet. Therefor the only thing I can do is rely on my own experiences and observations. I do not think we will ever come to an agreement, further argument seems moot as I have said all that I can sat, my opinion is unchanged and will remain so. However I wish you well and do not resent your opinion just because I do not agree with you.