Isabel Allende wrote:

American Academy of Pediatrics

http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/ … lness.aspx

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/2/184

http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/ … Later.aspx

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/c … 8.abstract

I still don't think there's enough to prove definitively that either side is right or wrong, but you wanted research so there it is. Although I'm not sure how many people on MM are actually able to adequately evaluate and understand scientific research and data.

There is only one person in this thread who can evaluate and understand scientific research and data because the person is a scientist!

Good Egg Productions wrote:

Correlation does not imply causation.

Oh--you think the depression, alcohol and drug abuse, and those other issues people had later in life might have caused the kids to be spanked in the past?  How would that work, exactly... 

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
There is only one person in this thread who can evaluate and understand scientific research and data because the person is a scientist!

No, you don't NEED to be a scientist, you just need to have an understanding of science, the terminology, and how studies and such work and what they mean. You are being silly again. Lots of people in medical fields, even pre-med courses along with other fields learn how to read and understand scientific research, even though they don't go on to become scientists themselves.

Don't ask me to post research if you are just going to dismiss it with more silly comments.

Mac is Live wrote:
Most people don't want to admit they are wrong.

Here are more links:

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/06/spankin … _abuse.php

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/02 … s-20120702

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/spanking-k … d=16695697

I don't know if it's that or if they don't want to admit to themselves that their parents didn't treat them so well...  Personally, I gave my parents a pass of spanking us as they didn't know any better--it's how they were raised and the research about the ill effects of spanking weren't readily available.

But it's different today...

GeorgeMann wrote:
Why did I spank three kids that are now responsible adults that also believe a spanking works in most occasions of misbehavior??
Because it worked.

But why spanking over other methods that work but don't involve you hitting your kids?

M A S T E R S wrote:

Those educated professional merely make educated guesses.

Which are better than your uneducated guesses...

Isabel Allende wrote:

No, you don't NEED to be a scientist, you just need to have an understanding of science, the terminology, and how studies and such work and what they mean. You are being silly again. Lots of people in medical fields, even pre-med courses along with other fields learn how to read and understand scientific research, even though they don't go on to become scientists themselves.

Don't ask me to post research studies if you are just going to ignore them.

I didn't ask you to.
This person knows how examine studies and evaluate them or tear them apart.  When you actually write research papers you are able understand them much better.

Gianantonio wrote:
So, even given the above—to those who do or plan to spank their kids--Why would you choose to spank your kids?

Farenell Photography wrote:
Because it can be the lesser of two evils.

You are setting up a false dichotomy here...

Farenell Photography wrote:
Would you rather than have a sore red fanny or a burnt hand because they touched the hot stove?

I would keep them away from the hot stove...  Yes, I know that can be inconvenient.  But until they know not to touch it, why would I let them go near it?

Farenell Photography wrote:
Would you rather their butt hurt or have brain damage because they didn't look while crossing the road while chasing their ball & got hit by a car?

Again, I wouldn't let my kids play near a road until they knew not to run out in it...  I mean, it really makes me wonder how a parent who has a kid too young to know NOT to run out into the street lets their kid play near a street!

Farenell Photography wrote:
Also there's a difference between a spanking that makes their butt hurt for 10 minutes & a spanking that either leaves it hurt for hours OR leaves black & blue marks.

Yes--we've been over this...  :eyeroll:

M A S T E R S wrote:
Those educated professional merely make educated guesses.

Gianantonio wrote:
Which are better than your uneducated guesses...

Then there are professionals for the spankings...after 10 years of research, as was already linked.

So your reply...can be said the same of you! 

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I didn't ask you to.
This person knows how examine studies and evaluate them or tear them apart.  When you actually write research papers you are able understand them much better.

You have proven yourself to be the type that closes your ears to anything that may contradict your personal opinion.

You complain that the only person to post a study has contradicted the OP's claims, but I post studies that helps to back them and you toss them aside as meaningless.

Anyways, I'll post this again for anyone who missed it since everyone is calling for studies and what the consensus is among some of the leading associations in this subject's field

http://www.healthychildren.org/English/ … nking.aspx

"Where We Stand: Spanking

The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly opposes striking a child for any reason. If a spanking is spontaneous, parents should later explain calmly why they did it, the specific behavior that provoked it, and how angry they felt. They also might apologize to their child for their loss of control. This usually helps the youngster to understand and accept the spanking, and it models for the child how to remediate a wrong."

I think people should ultimately do what they think is best while making an informed decision on their stance, which includes being informed on differing scientific findings and opinions. There is nothing more annoying than willful ignorance.

I don't find parents who choose to spank to be automatic bad parents, but many of them really seem to find anyone who chooses not to spank to be poor parents who do not discipline and raise spoiled brats. There are many forms of discipline to choose from.

Damon Banner wrote:

You need to learn to reason with them.  Appeal to them, on an adult level.

Fuck that. Without consequences that are swift and sure a child will ignore you when you are not looking and say ooops, I forgot when you are. Accompanied with a long rap about why they are getting spanked, what they could do in the future to prevent from getting spanked and then the spanking itself this is the best you can do for very young children.

Dark Magus wrote:

Fuck that. Without consequences that are swift and sure a child will ignore you when you are not looking and say ooops, I forgot when you are. Accompanied with a long rap about why they are getting spanked, what they could do in the future to prevent from getting spanked and then the spanking itself this is the best you can do for very young children.

He was being sarcastic.

In case you didn't realize, which you might've.

Isabel Allende wrote:

You have proven yourself to be the type that closes your ears to anything that may contradict your personal opinion.

You complain that the only person to post a study has contradicted the OP's claims, but I post studies that helps to back them and you toss them aside as meaningless.

Anyways, I'll post this again for anyone who missed it since everyone is calling for studies and what the consensus is among some of the leading associations in this subject's field

http://www.healthychildren.org/English/ … nking.aspx

"Where We Stand: Spanking

The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly opposes striking a child for any reason. If a spanking is spontaneous, parents should later explain calmly why they did it, the specific behavior that provoked it, and how angry they felt. They also might apologize to their child for their loss of control. This usually helps the youngster to understand and accept the spanking, and it models for the child how to remediate a wrong."

People should ultimately do what they think is best and make an informed decision on their stance, which includes being informed on differing scientific findings and opinions. There is nothing more annoying than willful ignorance.

I don't find parents who choose to spank to be automatic bad parents, but many of them really seem to find anyone who chooses not to spank to be poor parents who do not discipline and raise spoiled brats. There are many forms of discipline to choose from.

I actually don't like to spank but have found that it is sometimes necessary and effective.
I have had experience with my daughter, her daughter, an exchange student who is now on her way to becoming a heart surgeon, my wife's niece who lived with us for awhile and is now a doctor.

Gianantonio wrote:



Actually, I think scientists are required to use as many words as possible in their answers...   

Ugh, tell that to my brothers. 

What are you working on, dude?

Just... stuff.  ::eyeroll::

MoRina wrote:
I served 8 years in the military.  I am a mother of a 25 year old and raised my son by myself from the age of 1.

Slow clap.

Thank you for taking on two of the most self sacrificing jobs possible.

Isabel Allende wrote:
I never understand why people get so upset with each other over different parenting choices. Everyone wants to be proved right. But, you won't know how well you did over-all until they are grown and there's a lot more to raising good adults than if you spank or don't. We're kind of over simplifying things here when it comes to what really makes a good parent.

/thread

Legacys 7 wrote:
Education don't always mean one has common sense. I see a few of you in here that lack that. If a doctor tells you that you need to take a pill just because he's a doctor with a degree, do you take it?

In some cases, you'd be insane not to.  It all depends on whether it's one of those cases or not.

Naughty Ties wrote:
Oh for christ's sake, someone else who thinks they need the help of books and articles on how to raise/discipline kids. Pretty amazing on how well kids behaved 10 or 20 years ago without all the phony "help" books out there that some parents seem to need.

There were parenting books out there 40 and 50 years ago.  In fact, my great grandmother, while she didn't have a book about it, she had a file of "childrearing techniques."  Parents have been needing help to raise their children for eons.

Connor Photography wrote:
Why?  becasue I am the boss, I can beat the sh*t out them if I want to.  Kids need to be disciplined if they were not up to the level of expectations.

I hope this is sarcasm and an overstatement based on irritation at the topic...

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
Eliza just mentioned something above that questions scientific proof!!

We can bring a lot of scientists who practiced bunk science into the discussion.  Just because one scientist, or even one group of scientists, came up with a shitty theory and manipulated data to back themselves up doesn't mean that all science is faulty. 

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
As I said before there is only one scientist in this thread who has presented research.
This research counters the OP.

Nobody posting in this thread has the credentials to weigh in on this topic, in an authoritative, scientific manner. 

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
There is only one person in this thread who can evaluate and understand scientific research and data because the person is a scientist!

Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean that their opinion holds more weight about everything.  If someone is working with chemistry, they likely have as much knowledge and experience with child psychology as you and I do. Maybe less. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you just that.

And, it's safe to say that there's one "scientist" that we *know* of.  Not everyone here has made their educational credentials known...

Lieza Nova wrote:

Gianantonio wrote:


Actually, I think scientists are required to use as many words as possible in their answers...   

Ugh, tell that to my brothers. 

What are you working on, dude?

Just... stuff.  ::eyeroll::

MoRina wrote:
I served 8 years in the military.  I am a mother of a 25 year old and raised my son by myself from the age of 1.

Slow clap.

Thank you for taking on two of the most self sacrificing jobs possible.

Isabel Allende wrote:
I never understand why people get so upset with each other over different parenting choices. Everyone wants to be proved right. But, you won't know how well you did over-all until they are grown and there's a lot more to raising good adults than if you spank or don't. We're kind of over simplifying things here when it comes to what really makes a good parent.

/thread

Legacys 7 wrote:
Education don't always mean one has common sense. I see a few of you in here that lack that. If a doctor tells you that you need to take a pill just because he's a doctor with a degree, do you take it?

In some cases, you'd be insane not to.  It all depends on whether it's one of those cases or not.

Naughty Ties wrote:
Oh for christ's sake, someone else who thinks they need the help of books and articles on how to raise/discipline kids. Pretty amazing on how well kids behaved 10 or 20 years ago without all the phony "help" books out there that some parents seem to need.

There were parenting books out there 40 and 50 years ago.  In fact, my great grandmother, while she didn't have a book about it, she had a file of "childrearing techniques."  Parents have been needing help to raise their children for eons.

Connor Photography wrote:
Why?  becasue I am the boss, I can beat the sh*t out them if I want to.  Kids need to be disciplined if they were not up to the level of expectations.

I hope this is sarcasm and an overstatement based on irritation at the topic...

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
Eliza just mentioned something above that questions scientific proof!!

We can bring a lot of scientists who practiced bunk science into the discussion.  Just because one scientist, or even one group of scientists, came up with a shitty theory and manipulated data to back themselves up doesn't mean that all science is faulty. 

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
As I said before there is only one scientist in this thread who has presented research.
This research counters the OP.

Nobody posting in this thread has the credentials to weigh in on this topic, in an authoritative, scientific manner.


Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean that their opinion holds more weight about everything.  If someone is working with chemistry, they likely have as much knowledge and experience with child psychology as you and I do. Maybe less. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you just that.

And, it's safe to say that there's one "scientist" that we *know* of.  Not everyone here has made their educational credentials known...

How little you know.  There is a person with scientific credentials who has posted.

Jeffs Photography wrote:

Gianantonio,
What methods do you employ to discipline your children?

I have spanked my kids, and I may do so in the future. It is not something I like to do, nor do I plan on doing it. I have three fairly well rounded kids and I believe I do a pretty decent job as a parent. Am I flawless? Of course not, but I do not see a problem with spanking.

Well my kids are 23 and 19--so nothing now.

But when they were little, we used a variety of methods:  Time outs, removal of privileges, maybe others--but it has been so long since I've had to discipline either of them it's hard to remember.  Earlier in the summer we were trying to figure out when the last time-out they got was.  We figured maybe 3rd or 4th grade?  But more than the specific discipline methods, we ran a consistent household.   The kids knew our expectations of them--and those changed according to their developmental abilities at the time, so our expectations were age-appropriate.  And the kids knew there were consequences for not meeting our expectations.  Asking why was encouraged--even for the rules.  They knew they could always question a rule and potentially re-negotiate it.  But they first had to follow it.  They knew certain rules were safety-related and were non-negotiable.

So I guess I'd say our approach to discipline was a part of our overall approach to raising our kids--and it was based on respect.  That's why hitting never entered into it.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

I actually don't like to spank but have found that it is sometimes necessary and effective.
I have had experience with my daughter, her daughter, an exchange student who is now on her way to becoming a heart surgeon, my wife's niece who lived with us for awhile and is now a doctor.

And that's fine, but it doesn't make people who choose not to spank at all bad parents who raise wild kids with no discipline. Which is the same thing as not all people who choose to spank raise mentally ill rage-heads.

There's much more to how a child is going to turn out than spanking or not. We simplify that fact when we generalize what that one single choice in parenting turns kids into instead of looking at how they are raised over-all. Raising a good kid is not just about spanking or not and good kids can be raised by parents who choose to do either.

Ivanafox wrote:
I had a daughter that as a toddler would always run off. When she did this in car parks she got a big smack because she was nearly killed a few times. She quickly learnt that if she ran off in a car park it would hurt. The smack hurts less than getting squashed by a car so to me any emotional trauma I may have caused her by the smack far outweighs the emotional trauma to me, her father, her siblings, her grandparents and the driver if she had been run over. (people drive way too fast in carparks here in Oz, very scary)
So yes, I did sometimes smack my kids. As a mother who has first hand and immediate knowledge of her children and the situation I made the best judgement call I had available to me, N0-one is going to guilt me for doing it.

Why didn't you just hold on to her so she wouldn't run off?

Gianantonio wrote:
Well my kids are 23 and 19--so nothing now.

But when they were little, we used a variety of methods:  Time outs, removal of privileges, maybe others--but it has been so long since I've had to discipline either of them it's hard to remember.  Earlier in the summer we were trying to figure out when the last time-out they got was.  We figured maybe 3rd or 4th grade?  But more than the specific discipline methods, we ran a consistent household.   The kids knew our expectations of them--and those changed according to their developmental abilities at the time, so our expectations were age-appropriate.  And the kids knew there were consequences for not meeting our expectations.  Asking why was encouraged--even for the rules.  They knew they could always question a rule and potentially re-negotiate it.  But they first had to follow it.  They knew certain rules were safety-related and were non-negotiable.

So I guess I'd say our approach to discipline was a part of our overall approach to raising our kids--and it was based on respect.  That's why hitting never entered into it.

Every child is different.  Some kids don't need much discipline.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
How little you know.  There is a person with scientific credentials who has posted.

She is not a child psychologist though, which is what I think Lieza meant when she said there is no one qualified to be speaking on this subject as an authority in the matter.

Which she goes on to explain, if you would have kept reading her post and she makes a fantastic point.

Lieza Nova wrote:
Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean that their opinion holds more weight about everything.  If someone is working with chemistry, they likely have as much knowledge and experience with child psychology as you and I do. Maybe less. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you just that.

And, it's safe to say that there's one "scientist" that we *know* of.  Not everyone here has made their educational credentials known...

Good Egg Productions wrote:

Here's the problem with studies.  When you design a sociological or psychological test, you begin with looking for a correlation.  Well, guess what.  Chances are, you'll find it.  Hell, even scientific studies that don't involve human behavior can be looked at two different ways to give two VERY different results.

Example:  Red wine contains heathful antioxidants that the body benefits from.
Or: Red wine contains alcohol which is a poison to the body and causes liver damage.

If you're publishing a paper, your research and results will support your hypothesis.

But how can behavior later in life impact how you were disciplined in the past...?

Yes--the saying is correlation does not imply causation.  But you know what?  The rest of that saying is "except when there is a definite temporal order to the events because the future can't impact the past."

Isabel Allende wrote:

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
How little you know.  There is a person with scientific credentials who has posted.

She is not a child psychologist though, which is what I think Lieza meant when she said there is no one qualified to be speaking on this subject as an authority in the matter.

which she goes on to explain, if you would have kept reading her post

This person is a great researcher and can evaluate data and research better than anyone here including myself.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
Nobody posting in this thread has the credentials to weigh in on this topic, in an authoritative, scientific manner.

How little you know.  There is a person with scientific credentials who has posted.

Yes.  Eliza has a degree in paleoclimatology.  We know. 

She does not have a degree in child psychology, which would be relevant to this topic.

I stand by this:  "Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean that their opinion holds more weight about everything.  If someone is working with chemistry, they likely have as much knowledge and experience with child psychology as you and I do. Maybe less. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you just that. "

We also still don't know the educational credentials of everyone on the thread...

Lieza Nova wrote:

Yes.  Eliza has a degree in paleoclimatology.  We know. 

She does not have a degree in child psychology, which would be relevant to this topic.

I stand by this:  "Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean that their opinion holds more weight about everything.  If someone is working with chemistry, they likely have as much knowledge and experience with child psychology as you and I do. Maybe less. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you just that. "

We also still don't know the educational credentials of everyone on the thread...

She knows have to evaluate research better than we can no matter which field it is in.

Gianantonio wrote:
Pushing the limits?  Yes--we all do this every day of our lives.  Why shouldn't kids?

Isabel Allende wrote:
Kids do test boundaries.
But, that doesn't mean that spanking is the ONLY right option when it comes to punishing them when they do something wrong, no matter if it's out of boundary testing or not.

Indeed!  If you think i'm pro-spanking, you really haven't been paying attention! 

j3_photo wrote:

M A S T E R S wrote:
Those educated professional merely make educated guesses.

Then there are professionals for the spankings...after 10 years of research, as was already linked.

So your reply...can be said the same of you! 

What?

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
This person is a great researcher and can evaluate data and research better than anyone here including myself.

A close friend of mine has a degree in child psych.
She and her husband are against spanking and do not spank their kid and her kid is a little sweet-heart.

I'll listen to them before I will someone with a degree in something completely irrelevant to the development of children. No matter if they say they are a great researcher in said opposite field of study or not.

Gianantonio wrote:
What?

Of course you don't get it...your mind is waaaay too closed.

Open it up and think about what I said.  Your reply to Masters can be applied to you as well!

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

How little you know.  There is a person with scientific credentials who has posted.

Indeed.  But I try not to flaunt it.

Isabel Allende wrote:

A close friend of mine has a degree in child psych.
She and her husband are against spanking.

I'll listen to them before I will someone with a degree in something completely irrelevant to the development of children. No matter if they say they are a great researcher or not.

A great point was brought up about the child psychologists in the Satanic Abuse scandal.  Look what happened when they were listened to!

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

She knows have to evaluate research better than we can no matter which field it is in.

In paleoclimatology.  Not in child psychology.

Thinking that anyone with a degree in a scientific field is automatically an authority on every scientific field is like stating that a psychiatrist can perform brain surgery, because he/ she went to medical school.

j3_photo wrote:

Of course you don't get it...your mind is waaaay too closed.

Open it up and think about what I said.  Your reply to Masters can be applied to you as well!

No.  I had trouble following the "sentence" structure--for lack of a better word for it--of your post.

Lieza Nova wrote:

In paleoclimatology.  Not in child psychology.

Thinking that anyone with a degree in a scientific field is automatically an authority on every scientific field is like stating that a psychiatrist can perform brain surgery, because he/ she went to medical school.

I said that she could evaluate research better than we can!  Some research is crap!

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

A great point was brought up about the child psychologists in the Satanic Abuse scandal.  Look what happened when they were listened to!

That is not a great point.
It's quite an absurd one actually.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
I said that she could evaluate research better than we can!  Some research is crap!

But, not the research I posted since the AAP wouldn't use it to build and back up their professional stance on spanking if it were faulty research.

And like I said before, you do not have to be a scientist to be able to evaluate research well.

Isabel Allende wrote:

That is not a great point.
It's quite an absurd one actually.

If you don't like the message shoot the messenger.   

Gianantonio wrote:

No.  I had trouble following the "sentence" structure--for lack of a better word for it--of your post.

You have trouble following quite a few things... 

Gianantonio wrote:
Indeed!  If you think i'm pro-spanking, you really haven't been paying attention! 

No, I don't/never did think that.
I just disagreed that kids don't push limits/boundaries.

Isabel Allende wrote:

But, not the research I posted since the AAP wouldn't use it to build and back up their professional stance on spanking if it were faulty research.

And like I said before, you do not have to be a scientist to be able to evaluate research well.

Many organizations have an agenda.  The research can be slanted to support their agenda and get money for more research.