Post by: geronimotwo on February 29, 2008, 01:53:11 PM
Quote
Fri Feb 29, 1:02 PM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters Life!) - Parents who teach "tough love" by disciplining their children with spankings could be making them more likely to have sexual problems as teenagers and adults, a leading researcher said.
ADVERTISEMENT
Professor Murray Straus, of the University of New Hampshire, found that children who are spanked or experience other corporal punishment have a raised risk as teenagers and adults to verbally or physically coerce a partner into having sex.
"It's more evidence that parents should not spank if the wellbeing of their children is at stake," he said in an interview.
Straus analyzed the results of the International Dating Violence Study, a survey of more than 14,000 university students at 68 universities in 32 countries. The students were asked if they had been spanked or hit frequently before age 12 and if they had coerced a sexual partner in the previous 12 months.
Men who had experienced corporal punishment were four times more likely to physically coerce a partner into having sex, than those who had not experienced a lot of corporal punishment.
Physical coercion includes holding someone down or hitting them. Women who had experienced corporal punishment were also more likely to coerce sex from a partner than those who had not been spanked.
"People generalize that the use of coercion, physical coercion, is okay. They learn that from people they love and respect - their parents," said Straus, who presented the findings at a summit of the American Psychological Association.
Both men and women who had experienced corporal punishment as children were less than 10 percent more likely than those who had not been spanked to verbally coerce sex from a partner.
Straus said studies have shown that corporal punishment leads to low self control and self esteem, as well as aggressiveness, antisocial personalities and the understanding that violence is okay which may lead to sexual coercion.
He added that there are alternative ways to discipline children that work better and do not have side effects.
NEW YORK (Reuters Life!) - Parents who teach "tough love" by disciplining their children with spankings could be making them more likely to have sexual problems as teenagers and adults, a leading researcher said.
ADVERTISEMENT
Professor Murray Straus, of the University of New Hampshire, found that children who are spanked or experience other corporal punishment have a raised risk as teenagers and adults to verbally or physically coerce a partner into having sex.
"It's more evidence that parents should not spank if the wellbeing of their children is at stake," he said in an interview.
Straus analyzed the results of the International Dating Violence Study, a survey of more than 14,000 university students at 68 universities in 32 countries. The students were asked if they had been spanked or hit frequently before age 12 and if they had coerced a sexual partner in the previous 12 months.
Men who had experienced corporal punishment were four times more likely to physically coerce a partner into having sex, than those who had not experienced a lot of corporal punishment.
Physical coercion includes holding someone down or hitting them. Women who had experienced corporal punishment were also more likely to coerce sex from a partner than those who had not been spanked.
"People generalize that the use of coercion, physical coercion, is okay. They learn that from people they love and respect - their parents," said Straus, who presented the findings at a summit of the American Psychological Association.
Both men and women who had experienced corporal punishment as children were less than 10 percent more likely than those who had not been spanked to verbally coerce sex from a partner.
Straus said studies have shown that corporal punishment leads to low self control and self esteem, as well as aggressiveness, antisocial personalities and the understanding that violence is okay which may lead to sexual coercion.
He added that there are alternative ways to discipline children that work better and do not have side effects.
while i am a believer in teaching by example, wouldn't it seem likely that those with disciplinary problems early in their lives would continue to have "issues" later? ie, which came first the chicken or the egg?
Post by: Perd Hapley on February 29, 2008, 02:13:16 PM
I probably should not even dignify that tripe with an emoticon.
Post by: Bogie on February 29, 2008, 02:29:40 PM
A little ritualized humiliation (i.e., a swat that doesn't really hurt all that much) tends to drive the point home very well that Junior needs to adjust his attitude.
Post by: Ryan in Maine on February 29, 2008, 02:33:24 PM
Quote
Straus analyzed the results of the International Dating Violence Study, a survey of more than 14,000 university students at 68 universities in 32 countries.
There's your problem.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 29, 2008, 02:45:37 PM
Would you rather they be spanked as a little kid when they act up, or shot as a young adult when they act up because they weren't ever spanked?
Post by: Tallpine on February 29, 2008, 02:49:59 PM
Quote
Women who had experienced corporal punishment were also more likely to coerce sex from a partner than those who had not been spanked.
Okay, so what's the problem ?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 29, 2008, 03:08:02 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on February 29, 2008, 03:28:05 PM
Post by: lupinus on February 29, 2008, 03:37:49 PM
Guess now that we are so enlightend folk these days, God forbid we use methods that we know work.
Sitting Johnny in the corner does nothing but give him free time to plot *expletive deleted*it.
Post by: nico on February 29, 2008, 04:05:45 PM
Any so called researcher who ignores this loses all credibility in my eyes.
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on February 29, 2008, 04:10:45 PM
Post by: mtnbkr on February 29, 2008, 04:45:36 PM
Sitting Johnny in the corner does nothing but give him free time to plot *expletive deleted*it.
I will say, for my daughter, a time-out is a greater deterrent than spanking. Just the thread of a time-out is enough to make her stop the offending behavior.
Chris
Post by: nico on February 29, 2008, 05:42:33 PM
Sitting Johnny in the corner does nothing but give him free time to plot *expletive deleted*it.
I will say, for my daughter, a time-out is a greater deterrent than spanking. Just the thread of a time-out is enough to make her stop the offending behavior.
Standing in the corner (I wasn't allowed to sit, touch the wall, or turn away from the corner) was a much more effective punishment for me than spanking. With spanking, it was over in a minute. Standing in the corner was a long, drawn out pain in the ass.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 29, 2008, 05:55:07 PM
Post by: Tuco on February 29, 2008, 06:11:10 PM
for me the deal is not spanking when i'm angry.
That's my opinion, also.
I try to minimize spanking, saving it for situations that require immediate compliance i.e. personal safety.
I hope my six year old never needs it again.
I was spanked regularly as a kid and even today it still pisses me off that the old f#<%er couldn't find a better way to deal with my inconvenience.
Bitter?
Yea.
Forgiveness?
Not today.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 29, 2008, 06:26:25 PM
Post by: BridgeWalker on February 29, 2008, 06:40:34 PM
When it comes to hitting, I'm pretty firmly in the anti camp. Pretty atypical for me, I prefer more traditional approaches as a rule (see above). But, I can't see the good in hitting kids. I'm open to being convinced, because I'm rarely comfortable with rejecting tradition, but I've never found that being punished for something has has been the most effective way to help me develop in good ways.
Maybe I just got hit or otherwise punished too much. Maybe I'm weird. But, I don't think that being hit did me any good, and I'm pretty sure it did me significant harm. I very much doubt I'll hit my daughter.
Post by: Perd Hapley on February 29, 2008, 07:25:42 PM
Post by: Stand_watie on February 29, 2008, 10:32:34 PM
Post by: Declaration Day on February 29, 2008, 11:36:37 PM
I didn't "hit" them or "beat" them. One swift, open-handed swat on the ass, when needed, did the trick. It always came after a fair warning.
They're 11 and 13 now, and when told to stop misbehaving, they stop immediately and reply with a respectful "Yes, dad."
I have some hippy-ish cousins who don't spank their kids. They also treat them nearly as equals, meaning there's very little assertion of authority in their home. While the kids are generally good, they have to be told a dozen times to stop misbehaving before they even consider listening. They seem happy with that, and that's fine, but it doesn't fly in my home. When my family visits and their kids act up, I won't hesitate to say "Discipline your kids or I will."
Post by: Iain on March 01, 2008, 01:26:40 AM
Just the thread of a time-out is enough to make her stop the offending behavior.
Chris
Chris
Which time out threads do you make her read on APS? I'd go with the gold standard ones.
Post by: mtnbkr on March 01, 2008, 03:02:51 AM
Chris
Post by: lupinus on March 01, 2008, 03:29:01 AM
Quote
I will say, for my daughter, a time-out is a greater deterrent than spanking. Just the thread of a time-out is enough to make her stop the offending behavior.
Not saying it can't work. Does fine for plenty kids.But it's hard to discount the effect a well timed smack upside the head.
Post by: Warhorse on March 01, 2008, 04:39:05 AM
Yes, we did use other forms of discipline such as time out and sitting in a corner but it wasn't often necessary, at least for me.
I think a lot depends on your home situation and insisting on good manners and behavior. (i suspect that ther is a lot of luck involved, too.)
Warhorse
Post by: BridgeWalker on March 01, 2008, 05:02:57 AM
Hitting?
I don't see much point in euphemisms in this case
Swatting, smacking, and spanking are all euphemisms for hitting.
I see three types of evidence for making a decision on this: science, folk wisdom, and personal experience. Science says that hitting is bad. Folk wisdom says that spanking, swatting, and smacking are necessary, but is mostly unable to recognize that these things are hitting, and that it's generally not cool to hit people who are smaller and weaker than you. Personal experience says that hitting kids is bad news.
My husband was never spanked. I was. He's never feared his parents. I did. My fear of displeasing my parents caused some pretty severe problems. Between me and my husband, he is *definitely* and by far the better adjusted.
In any case, I'm open to other opinions, but retreating into euphemism is a pretty sad approach.
Hit: 1. to deal a blow or stroke to
Swat: 1. to hit; slap; smack.
Smack: 1. to strike sharply, esp. with the open hand or a flat object
Spank: 1. to strike (a person, usually a child) with the open hand, a slipper, etc., esp. on the buttocks, as in punishment.
Post by: Perd Hapley on March 01, 2008, 05:11:06 AM
Believe me, I found spanking plenty painful. And plenty embarrassing. My parents used hands, belts and wooden paddles and such. I don't find "spank" to be an especially soothing term.
Now science says that spanking is bad? Must have missed that one.
Post by: Bigjake on March 01, 2008, 05:12:39 AM
Waterboarding is more effective and doesn't leave any marks.
lmao, you aint right.
If spanking really did lead to deviant sexual behavior and all that noise, S&M would be totally mainstream. It's only been the past couple F'd up generations that we're too squeamish to actually discipline kids, and now we're seeing the results.
Post by: roo_ster on March 01, 2008, 05:43:04 AM
We use most of the disciplinary tools in th tool box: spanking, time out, & others, as appropriate.
Like many instances in life, it depends on the "totality of the circumstances."
Post by: grislyatoms on March 01, 2008, 06:49:20 AM
Quote
My parents spanked me until I was old enough to be reasoned with. I did the same with my kids, and so far they've turned out just fine.
I didn't "hit" them or "beat" them. One swift, open-handed swat on the ass, when needed, did the trick. It always came after a fair warning.
They're 11 and 13 now, and when told to stop misbehaving, they stop immediately and reply with a respectful "Yes, dad."
I didn't "hit" them or "beat" them. One swift, open-handed swat on the ass, when needed, did the trick. It always came after a fair warning.
They're 11 and 13 now, and when told to stop misbehaving, they stop immediately and reply with a respectful "Yes, dad."
That's where kiddo and I are right now. Usually just a look will get her straightened out, quickly, nowadays.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on March 01, 2008, 06:50:12 AM
i caught a lotta beatings and left home at 15 mutual decision when we started hurting each other. and often i was the instigator.
my sis was straight a plus student never gave any trouble got spanked at most once maybe never yale law school whole bit.
her son is just like me. and my daughter is just like her, thank you jesus!
this makes me think that genetics plays a role. i'm not qualified to say what role.
my sister is a none hitter. my brother in law showed me the neatest trick though. you rest your hand on back of childs neck pinch the lil hairs at the nape of the neck and twist . hurts doesn't leave a mark no hitting motion to attract busy bodies in public and no way to accidentally hit too hard. the kids act like kittens when you pick em up by the scruff of the neck. its flawless.
there is a line not to be crossed with corporal puhnishment and i've been on both sides. one needs to be careful. a few years back some drunk kicked his kid in 7-11 so hard it picked the kid up off ground and slammed him against the wall. dad had immediate cause to regret that. i got him but only cause i was closest. there were 2 other guys coming to kick his butt when i turned around after breaking my hand. i thought for sre there might be legal repercussions but the cops around here have a sense of proportion. and the prosecutor head hunts child mistreatment with a vengance on the edge of obsesive.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on March 01, 2008, 07:00:12 AM
that said spanking can be a too easy short cut. its my last resort. i think it gets overused by some cause its so fast and easy. i know the difference between spanking and beating gotten both
Post by: grislyatoms on March 01, 2008, 07:00:33 AM
Quote
there is a line not to be crossed with corporal puhnishment and i've been on both sides.
So have I. One household it was restrained and was definitely discipline.
The other "household"... it was assault, plain and simple.
Post by: Perd Hapley on March 01, 2008, 08:34:51 AM
the best example of new age parenting i know of was my other sisters neighbors....they got results though.... he was the kid that killed the 6 year old neighbor girl when he was 12 hid her body under his bed. his dad blames the lil girl it was her fault for coming over.
Wow. Really? What was the girl's name?
Post by: Tallpine on March 01, 2008, 08:35:11 AM
Not that I was never spanked - I well remember one time when my cousins and I played a very cruel practical joke, and my mom took a belt to me in anger. That is actually a good experience to recall, as I deserved it and she didn't hold it against me forever.
OTOH - my SIL's kids were never spanked or even verbally corrected. They were a bunch of little wild animals. Quite a lot of trouble as teenagers, too - though we stay as far away as possible.
Post by: drewtam on March 01, 2008, 08:38:58 AM
Quote
there is a line not to be crossed with corporal puhnishment and i've been on both sides.
So have I. One household it was restrained and was definitely discipline.
The other "household"... it was assault, plain and simple.
This gets back to the euphemism argument. There is a difference between denotation and connotation. Although hitting and spanking might have the same literal definition. They are vastly different things.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
Post by: Perd Hapley on March 01, 2008, 08:42:55 AM
OK, not really murderous, but you know what I mean. And as far as buying things for little brats, I don't think I was begging for something every time Mom took me shopping. Would have been a waste of time, in most cases. The bills wouldn't have been paid if she gave in, either.
Post by: BlueStarLizzard on March 01, 2008, 08:47:27 AM
unfortunatly i learned the hard way, what would have been better learned with a spanking. i was told repeadatly not to bother bandit, one of our dogs, when she went under the porch. i ended up with five stiches under my eye. an inch higher and i would have lost my right eye.
i hate to say this, but the world is not always puppy dog tales and rainbows. i'm rather thankful that i learned that with a swat to the butt and sitting in the corner for awhile then by visiting the E.R. (at least most of the time)
Post by: Perd Hapley on March 01, 2008, 08:56:57 AM
This gets back to the euphemism argument. There is a difference between denotation and connotation. Although hitting and spanking might have the same literal definition. They are vastly different things.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
Something like that. It is precisely because "hitting" has such a broad range of meanings, that Bridgewalker's use of it was intentionally misleading. "Hitting a kid" usually refers to the sort of thing we would ALL recognize as child abuse.
Post by: Tuco on March 01, 2008, 09:44:12 AM
Although hitting and spanking might have the same literal definition. They are vastly different things.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
The same thing cassandrasdaddy said.
Leave the anger out of it.
I find the most effective thing I can do with my kids (6 and 3, not yet sociopaths or teenagers) is to express displeasure with inappropriate actions. Yes, spanking expresses displeasure. So can an early bedtime, or other denial of autonomy.
I still think spanking is an acceptable tool, but so is a 1911.
ANALOGY ALERT!!!
I don't pull out the 1911 when the neighbor's dog poops on my lawn.
I rarely spank.
Now, I believe verbal abuse can be as (more?) damaging than a well timed and rational swat on the butt. Have seen sickening public verbal punishments.
an aside.... My best friend is named Kevin. My six year old was busting my chops last night calling Kevin my "Sweetheart" and my "CutiePie love bunny".
I said, IN GOOD HUMOR that's fine, we'll see if your still laughing after the spanking.
She kept it up, and asked if I'd just wait till bedtime and spank her until she fell asleep.
Oh, this thread has caused some introspection over the last day.
Forgiveness? Most of the time.
Thank You for the forum.
Post by: Manedwolf on March 01, 2008, 10:03:33 AM
This gets back to the euphemism argument. There is a difference between denotation and connotation. Although hitting and spanking might have the same literal definition. They are vastly different things.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
Spanking is a discipline, a training of a foolish mind. It is preceded and followed by loving instruction and guidance.
Hitting is combat, an exertion of power whether for kill or dominance. It is not love, it is self will.
Something like that. It is precisely because "hitting" has such a broad range of meanings, that Bridgewalker's use of it was intentionally misleading. "Hitting a kid" usually refers to the sort of thing we would ALL recognize as child abuse.
Hit to the face or another body part that will bruise or cause injury is hitting.
An open-handed swat to the fatty tissue of the buttocks, the body's built-in cushion to sit on, while it might sting, will not cause injury. That is spanking. That is not hitting.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on March 01, 2008, 01:31:10 PM
the best example of new age parenting i know of was my other sisters neighbors....they got results though.... he was the kid that killed the 6 year old neighbor girl when he was 12 hid her body under his bed. his dad blames the lil girl it was her fault for coming over.
Wow. Really? What was the girl's name?
i forget it was in florida and there was a show on discovery a few weeks ago that had dads recorded interview.show was on kids who kill and dad was still blaming the girl. dad croaked mom still lived in house across from girls family
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on March 01, 2008, 02:30:29 PM
it was
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/browse_thread/thread/9976628fbe3651bb
http://maddieclifton.org/07-07-1999d.html