Vazquez 1 Philip Vazquez Dr.

Erin Dietel McLaughlin Community Based Writing and Rhetoric 11 November 2011 Violence Spawns Violence: An Analysis of the Effects of Corporal Punishment There are many methods of disciplining children. Some parents choose to place their children in time-out, a discipline strategy where children sit in a designated area to reflect on their behavior, some parents talk to their children about the reason why their behavior was wrong, and some parents use corporal punishment by spanking their children. According to Susan M. Turner, a university professor from Victoria, Canada, and the author of Something to Cry About, the definition of Corporal Punishment is the administration by a recognized authority figure upon a recognized subordinate of some level of physical pain for the purpose of causing the latter to suffer for an offense of inflicting a penalty for an offense. Further, it will be supposed that punishment, in the context of corporal punishment, has a morally, legally and politically acceptable purpose: to get the offender to avoid engaging in bad behavior (15). The issue of whether or not to use corporal punishment in both the home and in schools has been on ongoing debate by parents, scholars and psychologists. Some researchers believe that corporal punishment is a necessary punishment that is consistent with parental love while others believe that it has very negative implications. The issues of morality and long-term side-effects, along with the question of when does corporate punishment become child abuse have been the issues in question when discussing this controversial subject. Children who are disciplined with

Vazquez 2 corporal punishment have violent tendencies and view violence as an acceptable solution to problems. In addition, children who experience corporal punishment are more inclined to use this type of discipline on their children and are more likely to abuse their spouse. Children who are victims of corporal punishment are more violent than children of parents do not use corporal punishment. Dr. Bernadette J. Saunders, author of Physical Punishment in Childhood and researcher at Monash University, states that Evidence suggests that physical punishment may be responsible for depression and suicide, violence and crime, masochistic sexual relationships, and alienation (144). Studied by researches demonstrate that there is a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and childrens aggressive behavior. Greater normativeness of corporal punishment may be related to greater levels of societal violence (Lansford 259). When children witness aggressive behavior by their parents, they tend to believe this is appropriate behavior and imitate their parents. When children are young, they do not easily distinguish between right and wrong. Many parents use corporal punishment to stop negative behavior early, but by their actions parents are setting a bad example and are condoning aggressive behavior. Studies by Elizabeth Gershoff, a developmental psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin, reveal the relationship between the type of discipline used by parents with their children and the effects it has on their mental development. Gershoff has identified ten undesirable outcomes of corporal punishment Decreased moral internalization, increased child aggression and delinquent and antisocial behavior, decreased quality of relationship between parent and child, decreased child mental health, increased risk of being a victim of physical abuse, increased adult aggression and criminal and antisocial behavior, decreased adult mental health (Saunders 145).

Vazquez 3 These are terrible side-effects of corporal punishment. These effects are not guaranteed to happen, but corporal punishment increases the likelihood of these outcomes. Gershoff is not the only researcher to find negative effects associated with corporal punishment. Marie Eve Clement, professor at the University of Quebec in the department of psychology has revealed that: negative consequences for the child, and their links to other forms of more severe physical and psychological violence. In fact, more and more longitudinal research demonstrates the harmful effects of corporal punishment on the childs social development and on his or her behavioral problems (164). With less corporal punishment, aggressive behavior in children would decrease significantly. Another unfortunate consequence of physically punishing children is that it teaches them to view violence as an acceptable way to solve problems. A study conducted by two physiology professors Deaton and Deckard, professor of physiology at the University of Virginia Tech in Blacksburg VA, concluded that children in a society may also internalize cultural norms regarding the appropriateness of corporal punishment and generalize them to the acceptability of using physical force to solve problems in other domains of life (Lansford 267). When children witness corporal punishment as a form of problem solving, violence is acceptable and may be used throughout their life. According to Dominique Simons, a professor at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs in the Department of Psychology, children who experienced corporal punishment preferred aggressive conflict resolution strategies with peers and siblings. These findings support an additional side effect of spanking; when parents use corporal punishment it teaches their children that hitting is an acceptable means of dealing with conflict (639). Victims of corporal punishment see that authority figures are using violence and conclude

Vazquez 4 that it is acceptable, so the children use violence as well. According to Murray A. Straus, author of Beating the Devil out of Them: Corporal Punishment in American Families and its Effects on Children and Professor of Sociology and founder and Co-Director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire Research most often shows that corporal punishment and aggression are linked because of social learning, that is, when children imitate the parents violence (111). By hitting their children, parents are setting a bad example Monkey see monkey do. Children at a young age are very easily influenced and when they see authority figures hitting, they are going to imitate the behavior. Not only are children more violent at home, but their violent tendencies are following them to school and are using it against their peers, as evidenced by the following quote: Children also appeared to generalize this message to conflict situations, as indicated by their approval of hitting to resolve conflicts with peers and siblings (Simons 645). Corporal punishment in schools also has negative consequences. A study by Hyman and Wise, authors of Phycology in the School, conclude that with the increased authorization of school personnel to use corporal punishment violence increases It shows that the more school personnel are authorized to use corporal punishment, the higher the assault rate by children within schools. Of course, the reverse could also be true- the higher the rate of student assaults, the greater the authorization for corporal punishment by school personnel. These statistics, at a minimum however, show that hitting children does not reduce the level of in school violence to the level found in schools without corporal punishment. (Straus 113). If a teacher or school official use corporal punishment to set an example children believe that corporal punishment is acceptable. Children also view teachers and school officials as their

Vazquez 5 superiors and when they see that a teacher uses violence, they will do the same. Even if a parent does not use corporal punishment at home, if it is being used in school then the childs sense of normalcy is affected. Lastly the more frightening side-effects of corporal punishment are its long term effects on future generations. Victims of corporal punishment are more likely to use corporal punishment on their children or similarly they are more likely to use it on their spouses. Victims of corporal punishment who have experienced it from non-abusive parents see the context of their punishment in a loving way. They associate the hand with love. When parents use corporal punishment, it teaches children about the morality of hitting; that it is morally acceptable to hit those you love when they do wrong. Indeed, frequent spanking was the strongest predictor of childrens acceptance of hitting as a disciplinary method (Simons 645). When children become adults, they view corporal punishment in a positive manner and they have a much higher likelihood of using corporal punishment. Multiple studies have shown that children who are victims of corporal punishment usually endorse the use on their children. Simons findings supported an intergenerational cycle of violence; parents who experienced frequent corporal punishment during childhood perceived its use as acceptable and frequently spanked their children (Simons 639). If victims of corporal punishment view corporal punishment in a favorable way, they are much more likely to use it on their children. Another troubling side-effect of corporal punishment is that children who experienced corporal punishment are much more likely to abuse their spouses. The long term effect is to increase the chances of worse behavior and other problems, including impaired learning and delinquency, depression, child abuse, spouse beating, and other crimes (Straus 4). Ironically, parents use

Vazquez 6 corporal punishment to stop violent behavior of their children; however this only aggravates the cycle of violence, especially later in a childs life. Some people view the use of corporal punishment in a favorable way, arguing that it as a natural way to teach children right from wrong. Dr. James Dobson, author of popular parenting book Dare to Dream, believe that corporal punishment is a necessary punishment and that it is consistent with parental love. Dobson defines judicious corporal punishment as a natural learning process which involves (a) the infliction of a minor but stinging physical pain, (b) preferably caused by a switch or paddle, to the buttocks, (c) of a willfully antagonistic child not younger than fifteen months and not older than twelve years of age (Turner 128). Dobson believes that young children, and especially toddlers are very wild and need to be taught what is right. He argues that children do not have the proper societal attitudes, and that it is the parents job to make sure the children learn acceptable behavior. Dobsons definition is a very rare case, because young children between those ages are not willfully antagonistic to their parents. Young children usually do not understand right from wrong, and the use of corporal punishment should not be warranted. Dobson also adds that corporal punishment is only acceptable in certain instances. He restricts the use of corporal punishment to cases in which the punisher is a calm, rational parent or authorized parental agent who has never abused a child and does not enjoy inflicting such pain (Turner 128). At first glance this seems logical, but that situation is usually a myth. When a parent has to resort to such violence the parent is already stressed. A parent that does not enjoy inflicting pain on their child is not going to implement corporal punishment as a form of discipline. They are going to wait as long as possible before using it, and at that point the parent will no longer be a calm and rational parent. In fact nearly

Vazquez 7 all parents who are convicted of abusing their children began with a commitment to using corporal punishment against them and continued to believe that their abusive acts were just more of the same (Turner 134). Corporal punishment can easily get out of hand when the parents become accustomed to hitting their children. Once they first use it they are more likely to use it again and for a lesser offense. Some parents believe that corporal punishment and spanking are the most effective forms to discipline their children. There have not been many studies on the effectiveness of corporal punishment, because it is such a commonly accepted assumption that spanking works since it appears to have immediate results. Contrary to popular belief, the little amount of studies that have been conducted on the effectiveness of corporal punishment demonstrate that it is not the best form of discipline. Studies of both animals and children show that punishment is not more effective than other methods of teaching and controlling behavior. Some studies show it is less effective (Straus 149). There was a study led by Larzelare compares the effectiveness of corporal punishment and an alternative form of discipline. In the study he put children in time out. One half of the parents disciplining the children used spanking if the child tried to leave; the other half used a piece of wood to physically stop the child from leaving the time out. The results of the study showed that the corporal punishment and the board method had the same effectiveness in stopping the crime that the child committed to get the child into time out. Still there are some people that think that spanking and corporal punishment is harmless. The main argument is that I was spanked and I turned out okay. This is contrary to all of the research that has been published. Straus argues that the reason people say this is because they do not want to see their parents as people who have done something wrong, or accept they have done something wrong. Another reason is that the detrimental effects are gradual and not

Vazquez 8 noticed immediately. Straus compares the effects of corporal punishment to the effects of smoking. The delayed reaction and the small proportions seriously hurt are the same reason the harmful effects of smoking were not perceived for so long (153). Not everybody who is a victim of corporal punishment turns into a criminal or into a child or wife abuser, but the research speaks for itself. There is a larger likelihood that children who experienced corporal punishment are going to be more aggressive. They are usually more violent than their peers who did not experience corporal punishment. Corporal punishment, while still very popular in the United States, must be abolished. Corporal punishment only leads children to be more violent. Children also learn from corporal punishment that hitting is an acceptable means of dealing with problems, but worse of all studies have shown that victims of corporal punishment are much more likely to use it on their children. Corporal punishment is a never ending cycle of aggression. Users of corporal punishment need to realize that violence spawns violence and that corporal punishment has a lasting negative effects on children.

Vazquez 9 Work Cited Clement, Marie-Eve, and Claire Chamberland. "The Role Of Parental Stress, Mother's Childhood Abuse And Perceived Consequences Of Violence In Predicting Attitudes And Attribution In Favor Of Corporal Punishment." Journal Of Child And Family Studies 18.2 (2009): 163-171. ERIC. Web. 3 Nov. 2011. Lansford, Jennifer E., and Kenneth A. Dodge. "Cultural Norms For Adult Corporal Punishment Of Children And Societal Rates Of Endorsement And Use Of Violence." Parenting: Science & Practice 8.3 (2008): 257-270. Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Nov. 2011. Saunders, Bernadette J. Physical Punishment in Childhood. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2010. Print. Simons, Dominique A., and Sandy K. Wurtele. "Relationships Between Parents' Use Of Corporal Punishment And Their Children's Endorsement Of Spanking And Hitting Other Children." Child Abuse & Neglect: The International Journal 34.9 (2010): 639-646. ERIC. Web. 3 Nov. 2011. Straus, Murray A. Beating the Devil out of Them. New Brunswick: Lexington Books, 2001. Print. Turner, Susan M. Something to Cry About. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2002. Print.