Posted on 09/23/2014 6:28:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The image of Adrian Peterson’s son’s legs has ignited a welcome cultural conversation. This is unusual. Most of these contrived “conversations” are efforts to take one headline and shoehorn it into a narrative that liberals want to advance, usually about race and racism. Those “conversations” are never truthful.
But the discussion of a four-year-old boy’s wounds has elicited some brutally honest commentary.
Writing on CNN.com, Steven Holmes blasted what he regards as excessive tolerance for spanking and child abuse in the black community. He dispatches the “I was whipped and I turned out all right” excuse. Holmes cites the abundant research showing that “spanking inhibits the learning process . . . It leads to anger, depression, violence and alcohol and drug abuse. It breeds hostility toward authority . . . and spawns other antisocial behaviors.” Physical punishment, he continues “is associated with legions of sullen, angry, violence-prone boys . . . ”
Peterson advanced the “mean streets” argument. “I could have been one of those kids that was lost in the streets without the discipline instilled in me by my parents . . . ” Holmes replies: “This may have been true for Peterson. But what also could be true is that the streets may not have been so mean if they were not populated by so many kids who are angry at the world because, among other things, they were spanked.”
Physical punishment is almost as common among whites. Some conservatives defend spanking because they see critics as liberals who seek to undermine authority across the board. Doubtless, some are — and some liberal parenting approaches are enough to make you want to take a switch to the adult! (“Dylan, how would you feel if someone cut your fingers with scissors?”)
But to quote Mother Teresa on the subject of abortion, “Don’t resort to violence.” Of course there’s a difference between a swat on the bottom and a beating with a tree branch or electrical wire. But, frankly, why would anyone defend using violence to teach children right from wrong? We don’t do it with puppies and kittens anymore, for heaven’s sake.
Some research suggests that 66 percent of parents admit to striking their children, and 30 percent of those say they’ve spanked children as young as one year old. Picture a 1-year-old; just struggling to get to his feet; wobbling between the coffee table and the sofa. Is there no way, other than violence, to teach him not to pull the cat’s tail?
This is not to deny that kids can be extremely provoking, and that they are in dire need of limit setting. There is no harder job. When one of our sons was having behavior problems, we enrolled in a course for parents of children with autistic-spectrum disorders. We thought we had tried everything (except hitting of course). We hadn’t. Kids with this condition, we were told, don’t distinguish between good attention and bad attention. Acting out gets the notice they crave, even if it’s in the form of a reprimand or a time out.
One way to cope was to “catch them being good “ and then praise them lavishly. Their need for attention would be filled up with approval. Working toward rewards (tokens for clearing their place, making their beds, putting their shoes in the mud room) that could later be cashed in for prizes helped them plan for the future, delay gratification, and receive positive feedback. Did it work 100 percent of the time? Of course not. Did we sometimes resent having to establish these elaborate rituals for tasks that ought to be simple? Yes. But if we had hit the boy, his already fragile ego might never have recovered.
Studies have also shown that verbal abuse can be as damaging as physical violence. Children who are ridiculed or belittled by their parents, dismissed as “stupid” or “idiotic” just for doing childish things, are as prone to negative outcomes as those who are physically assaulted.
Some parents are abusive because they’re bad people. But many well-meaning parents may be harming their children in the misguided belief that hitting or insulting them instills important virtues, or at least does no harm. They might want to think again.
— Mona Charen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center
Yes.
I have read that parents who don’t spank yell more. Kids eyes will glaze over while they wait for the rant to end, learning nothing and not changing the behavior.
The one time I got the belt I had black-and-blue marks for a week...
It’s been 40 years and I STILL won’t tell a lie to my Father.
Used appropriately, negative physical feedback can be very effective. Used too much, and it can have an opposite effect as we see in cases of generational abuse.
This brain trust is completely disregarding the effect that the kids' social group has on their attitude. IMHO spanking was not meted out often enough, nor to the right subject.
“spanking inhibits the learning process . . . It leads to anger, depression, violence and alcohol and drug abuse. It breeds hostility toward authority . . . and spawns other antisocial behaviors.” Physical punishment, he continues “is associated with legions of sullen, angry, violence-prone boys . . . ” “
Evidence, please. (not poster, the person quoted).
I was spanked rarely and rarely spanked, but when I was or did, it was because other methods failed to work or the bad behavior was such that it could get someone killed (or worse).
Last resort, never in anger, rare, but sometimes necessary.
Punishment needs to be effective to create self-discipline in children. Spanking does that. I’m not sure whether there are more effective ways for most parents to instill that self-discipline. I suspect there may be but whether there are or not, its better to spank and have a child who can control himself or herself and be responsible for his or her own actions than a wild little terror who grows up to be irresponsible, lazy, unproductive and a net drain on society and his or her family.
There is a difference between a spanking and a beating.
We live in an era in which critical masses of parents do “time outs” rather than spanking.
I think we would all agree that beating children, physical assault, is not what we want to see happen. We want to see appropriate discipline, sometimes physical if needed.
Years ago, parents were free to spank their children. Now they aren’t.
Years ago, schools were allowed to administer corporal punishment. Now they aren’t. Nowadays, it’s against the law for authorities in schools to physically touch a child, otherwise be charged with assault.
Anecdotal evidence is that there are many ill mannered misbehaving children and teens when you go out in public. I think part of that is that parents today are not allowed to discipline children in the same manner as past generations could do.
What Adrian Peterson did was not spanking and he should be kicked out of the NFL and put in jail.
Hits with a belt that left black and blue marks that lasted a week? You were abused. Doesn’t mean your father didn’t love you; doesn’t mean that he wasn’t a good father over all; but it does mean that, at least on that occasion, you were abused.
“What Adrian Peterson did was not spanking and he should be kicked out of the NFL and put in jail.”
I have to agree with this - based on what I’ve heard, and provided that the facts are correct.
My opinion is, as general rule of thumb any type of punishment done with anger is likely to be ultimately ineffective and to lead to resentment. I know abuse, personally, and it was always done with almost a competitive ‘I’ll show you, I win/you lose’ mocking and/or hateful type of demeanor. That’s how you know the difference.
Further, I don’t buy the ‘it’s part of my culture’ argument. It’s not a legitimate excuse for causing physical injuries to a child. Slavery was also a ‘part of the culture’ at one time. That obviously didn’t make it right.
As with anything a parent must mete out punishment in calmer moments, not when you're angry. With my own kids I think spankings are best used for immediate behavior modification, and not as punishment per se. And thankfully I rarely have to do it.
What we have here is the same situation we have with the use of guns, food, and cold medicine: Because a few people abuse something then EVERYONE must stop doing it immediately, or their liberties MUST be stifled with more laws.
Your opinion.
Didn’t we just go through this about a week ago?
Watching videos during Time Out is NOT “Time Out”, so your criticism makes no sense. That’s akin to saying, “I know a family that took their kids to church every Sunday, and the kids sat in the church basement, watching Super Hero videos, while the parents were upstairs in the actual church...and the kids are now terrors...so don’t take your kids to church.”
I always laugh a time out a bit. It assumes a somewhat compliant child. Mine would just get up and leave from the chair unless physically restrained.
We resorted to taking away blankets/stuffed animals, putting the dog out, no dinner, etc.
I’ve just finished the draft for a book, regarding kids who totally own their parents.
Spanking is discussed as an option, along with about 60 other things a parent can do to subdue an incorrigible child. Just be wise about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.