Spanking

I am always very shocked by people who insist that spanking is child abuse. A week or so ago I heard a radio programme (All in the Mind, I think) that examined child mental health and conflated spanking with abuse. As I said at the time 'if you get a parent who ignores or shouts at a child, doesn't play or listen or explain and also spanks, and you're running a parenting education workshop, is spanking really so shocking that you only let the listener find out about the rest from parental testimony later in the programme'?

I was spanked as a child. That doesn't mean that I was abused; both I and my mother agree that spanking is a useful punishment in a parent's arsenal. My experience is that most people who have been spanked think of it as nothing special, and that many who haven't regard it as child abuse... and that's interesting in itself. But first, some quotations from others who've discussed their experiences and attitudes:

'When I was spanked as a kid, and when I spanked my own kids, the blows were actually very weak. The purpose of a spanking is not to inflict physically damage, but to issue a strong message that the child's behavior is unacceptable.

The 'drama' factor involved with a spanking is the key. I tried to take a moment after a spanking and make them apologize for whatever they did and sometimes even ask them if they knew why what they did was wrong. My kids feared the humiliation factor of the post-spanking ritual far more than the minor physical pain of the blows themself.

I could eventually get them (usually) to behave not by threatening to hit them, but by looking them in the eye and saying in a commanding voice "DO I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION? (pause) ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS? (pause) JUST LET ME KNOW IF WE NEED TO WORK ON YOUR BEHAVIOR."'
'When I was a kid, I got whacked with a variety of objects: switches, belts, wooden paddles...even got spankings in school by teachers. It wasnt seen as abuse.'
'I have also been spanked in school, (actually, as a mater of fact, I only have been spanked in school). And if it is not continuous, I don't see it as abuse'
‎'My dad used a belt and I turned out fine. I learned right from wrong real quick.'
'My mother had a wicked slap that could catch the most tender spots, I learned right from wrong by this and would not think to tell a parent how to reprimand there child unless it constituted either mental or physical abuse.'
'My parents used spanking very rarely. When they did there was a big buildup to it that was far worse than the actual act itself, which was always restrained. I think this was an effective way to do it.'
'It worked for you, good going, I was such a colossal pain in the arse, a real rebellious and imaginitive child who could twist things to look right, my mother never took the decision to spank lightly, in fact most times she wouldn't, but it's all too easy to judge the effectiveness based on your situation, and not someone elses. And science is hardly totally in agreement over the deal. If it's often used it's detremental, if it's used sparingly it can work, but only if it's used in conjunction with a variety of punishment, spanking has to be understood to be the last resort, and a rarity, if it's a first resort or common place then it loses all meaning. This I agree with, but then I was never subjected to it regularly.'
'...Personally I see striking one's own child would only encourage the child to believe that hitting other people is alright.

I guess it depends on how you actually hit him.'
'Never had anything bad on me nor anyone in my family. Nor anyone else I know.

Are you sure? "Bad" can be many things. Do you think that you realise how your childhood has affected you? For all you know your current political view can be a direct result of it '

Just so that you all know I'm not alone. I deliberately saved the interesting comments until last, but first, let's reconsider how to punish a child.

If a punishment is to be effective in teaching then the receiver needs to know why it's being administered. Since raising children is about teaching them to grow and understand, not just to keep out of your way, any and every punishment needs explanation. Spanking is no different. I'm not arguing that parents should walk into a room and deliver a crushing blow to their children's heads just to get them out of the way.
So spanking can be a punishment delivered as part of a stern telling-off which involves an explanation of the rules and a chance to accept guilt. It is not incompatible with the vital aspects of punishment.

Next up, a child needs to be able to link a punishment with rule-breaking. That means that the two need to be related. Young children have short memories and when one runs into the road or commits a similar, immediate wrong, you won't necessarily be able to take a sweet away (if you give your child sweets in the first place!). A punishment at the end of the day can seem every unrelated to a 'crime' earlier in the day. My memories of being that young are hazy (!), but I remember babysitting a trio of young boys, and the youngest certainly had problems with not getting his sweets in the evening (with me) because of actions he'd done earlier.

This gets me to the third main point, which is that a short, sharp punishment is not necessarily the cruelist. Throughout my life, and amongst many people I've known, many people have expressed the idea that long, drawn-out punishments can be worse than relatively painful, but brief, ones. It's not that new, either: Billy Bunter preferred a caning to coventry (being deliberately ignored by your peers) about a century ago.
There's something quite refreshing about getting the punishment over and done with, as presumably the action also is. You can return to liking your parents again without the dark clouds of abnormality hanging over you. I know I brooded and got angriest when I had time to brood about it (a bit like writing notes such as this when I have time). I think that there's a place for being grounded or stuck in one's bedroom, but not as a replacement for spanking.

Especially, I think that spanking a child early, when it has a shorter memory and perhaps less ability or inclination to consider the issue carefully, is justifiable. I'd agree that older children might need other punishments. Hitting doesn't teach a child to mistrust you if you explain causes and effects, and administer sane rules consistently. The difference from a dog is that a child does have understanding and can be reasoned with (/at).

But there's more than simply spanking to talk about! Let's return to those quotations which illustrate my thoughts:
'Are you sure? "Bad" can be many things. Do you think that you realise how your childhood has affected you? For all you know your current political view can be a direct result of it'
'...Personally I see striking one's own child would only encourage the child to believe that hitting other people is alright.'

Spanking is a political issue because it involves moulding people's childhoods. Some people see the body as sacrosanct and live in a world where violence is the ultimate evil. People who've grown up in an environment where it's not the worst thing that can happen, and where it is part of life, can't easily share that philosophy. I've considered violence before, when thinking about bullying:
http://whirlingsilently.blogspot.com/2010/04/greatest-evil.html

Do we live in an insulated bubble, protected from the world around us? Most of us do, mentally and physically, but I'm keen to burst that bubble. I like knowing the temperature outside, feeling the seasons and enjoying fresh air. I don't like closed, stale, hot rooms full of cleaning-fluid vapours (if I'm lucky). I know that I can fall down a hillside, get knocked off my bike or encounter new data. People might pursue a life of comfort and certainty, but that's not life; it's merely existence.
Spanking breaks down the barriers of dignity that a person builds, even at that young an age. But really, is it bad if you learn that your self-esteem doesn't come from what is done to you, but what you do?
Would I want my child to be repulsed by normal aspects of life, such as physical danger (when I take my child hiking, for example), or watching police, wars, or animals?
These are important questions about education and upbringing. They are not clear rights and wrongs, although it's obvious which side I prefer. You can't dismiss spanking because it makes someone more accepting of violence. Violence is a tool, not an outcome. Violence used by police to restrain a dangerous criminal is good.

Is my keenness on principles, and subordination of other concerns, such as the avoidance of violence, due to my upbringing, in which my mother stated rules (with reasons), and then enforced them, including using spanking (3 times I think)? When someone wants to ban spanking, it's an implicit assertion of a philosophical system that regards violence as wrong.

It includes intrinsic respect of others, no matter what their actions, which is a pleasant and modern humanistic doctrine, but a philosophical opinion nonetheless. What if I think that people who are grossly criminal don't deserve respect and that there is no such thing as deserving respect through being human: that one must earn respect?

To forbid spanking is a difficult issue, because there needs to be some control over what can be done to children, but it also naturally involves shaping their knowledge and view of the world, and that is how to teach the next generation to agree with your opinions. How are we to define abuse when we haven't agreed an over-arching philosophy by which to make laws and run the country?
Well, we can exclude things that are harmful, and beatings qualify there, as physical harms that can impede a child's physical growth and development. But when it comes to mental development, we might have to control ouselves, because what to one person might be bad, to another is his most cherished opinion.