The End of Spanking?
Spanking is so passé. At least the Council of Europe (a 47-country body that promotes civil liberties) hopes it will be soon.
The group has launched a campaign to abolish parental “smacking” the world over by 2009. That’s quite an ambitious goal, and, it seems to me, a strange one. Whatever your views on spanking, wouldn’t it be better to use a concerted, international movement to target child sex traffickers before setting your sites on parents who favor corporal discipline?
A recent article “Spare the Rod, Say Some” from The Economist heralded the campaign and the proliferation of anti-spanking laws across the pond as evidence that spanking is headed for the history books.
“A consensus against hitting children is clearly gathering momentum in the developed, law-governed parts of the world. Also growing is the belief that a light parental cuff and serious forms of child abuse are points, albeit quite far apart, on the same spectrum. Some parents may still insist that their right to dissuade a toddler from doing very dangerous things is also worth protecting; but they are losing the argument.”
As the article repeatedly points out, soon the only wealthy country where parents will be permitted to spank will be the United States, which the writer portrays as the last backward bastion for practitioners of the barbaric practice.
At the risk of offending European progressives, I’d like to put in my vote for keeping spanking legal. I think it’s just gotten a bad rap. Maybe I believe in spanking because I myself was spanked as a child. My father always did it in love and never in anger, which I think is the key for defending the embattled discipline.
Most of the arguments against spanking turn out to be straw man fallacies. They lump all manner of physical abuse—cuffing, slapping, shaking and battering—in with the practice and then attack it. But of course, any honest treatment of the subject will differentiate between cruel mistreatment and loving, restorative physical discipline. Christians who believe in spanking as a legitimate form of punishment should make the distinction clear. After all, the same Scriptures that instruct us not to “spare the rod” also command us to love our children and to not “exasperate” them.
The Economist may be right. The tide may turn on spanking, even in the United States. But wherever the practice is still lovingly carried out, I believe children will be better for it.
The group has launched a campaign to abolish parental “smacking” the world over by 2009. That’s quite an ambitious goal, and, it seems to me, a strange one. Whatever your views on spanking, wouldn’t it be better to use a concerted, international movement to target child sex traffickers before setting your sites on parents who favor corporal discipline?
A recent article “Spare the Rod, Say Some” from The Economist heralded the campaign and the proliferation of anti-spanking laws across the pond as evidence that spanking is headed for the history books.
“A consensus against hitting children is clearly gathering momentum in the developed, law-governed parts of the world. Also growing is the belief that a light parental cuff and serious forms of child abuse are points, albeit quite far apart, on the same spectrum. Some parents may still insist that their right to dissuade a toddler from doing very dangerous things is also worth protecting; but they are losing the argument.”
As the article repeatedly points out, soon the only wealthy country where parents will be permitted to spank will be the United States, which the writer portrays as the last backward bastion for practitioners of the barbaric practice.
At the risk of offending European progressives, I’d like to put in my vote for keeping spanking legal. I think it’s just gotten a bad rap. Maybe I believe in spanking because I myself was spanked as a child. My father always did it in love and never in anger, which I think is the key for defending the embattled discipline.
Most of the arguments against spanking turn out to be straw man fallacies. They lump all manner of physical abuse—cuffing, slapping, shaking and battering—in with the practice and then attack it. But of course, any honest treatment of the subject will differentiate between cruel mistreatment and loving, restorative physical discipline. Christians who believe in spanking as a legitimate form of punishment should make the distinction clear. After all, the same Scriptures that instruct us not to “spare the rod” also command us to love our children and to not “exasperate” them.
The Economist may be right. The tide may turn on spanking, even in the United States. But wherever the practice is still lovingly carried out, I believe children will be better for it.
posted by Drew Dyck at 9:28 AM
4 Comments:
I am not at all surprised that The Economist and the Council of Europe are against smacking or that the writer has portrayed the US as backwards for carrying on with the practice. The Economist is a Marxist periodical which is pretty much the default position of the progressive liberal mind here in Europe. The point is while we Americans look to our faith, traditions and the Bible for guidance on how to raise our children, modern "progressive" secular Europe looks to human wisdom, the State and progressive theory. They have pretty much jettisoned the role of God and have erected the state in place of Him. I work in a high school in the UK and it is plain to see the result. But if you look at the birth rates in Europe, pretty soon there won't be any children too smack. Save those of immigrants who are not going to care one whit for the ideas of secular child psychologists. Carry on America and let's do the right thing for our children.
I am very much against the action of spanking, and I have been a born again christian since I was 4. I was spanked all through my life until I ran away from home at 16 to get away from physical punishment. My mother and step-father did not spare the rod and I had bleeding welts on my back to prove it. Why didn't they ever try to talk to me, I envied kids in families that were not spanked. They were so loving with each other. I do not spank my kids, frankly they don't need it. I can talk with them about what they've done wrong and they understand. They do their best to be good. My kids are better behaved then alot of other kids that are spanked. I dont think humans can truly differitionate between spanking in love and flat out frustration beatings. I have yet to see a shepard beating his sheep with his rod, if there was he'd be in major trouble with animal protectors.I wish my parents would have talked to me and tried to understand me. I wish they would have activly been on my side, and really gotten to know me. They were busy doing all their churchy stuff and I was always interfering. I just wouldn't shut off and give them a break. My kids know I'm the boss, they respect me. If they dissappoint me they are all upset with themselves. They know that I will stick up for them, that my love won't be distracted. They can talk to me, and even raise their voice at me if they are frustrated, venting frustration in a safe place is ok and needs to be learned. It helps me to find out how they are feeling. Mabye God has blessed me with good kids. Whenever I have whitnessed violence against kids, it was always out of the parents personal frustration, and they didn't hear what the child was communicating.
And the reason birthrates are falling is because nobody can afford it anymore. I'd love to have a third child, but it is just too expensive.
@anonymous "Bleeding welts"? That sounds like they stepped into abuse there...
Actually in my case I can think of a time where my dad should have actually HIT me. I'm not talking spanking here. I sassed my mom and dad until they were so frustrated. I completely disrespected them. My mom got in the way but he SHOULD have hit me that day. I would have been a better man for it.
At any rate, my folks disciplined me by spanking and they did it in a super loving way. And I'm sure glad they did!
Anonymous,
You fall into the same error as The Council of Europe and The Economist in failing to differentiate between physical chastisement and flat out abuse. The role of smacking is not to be the first resort for punishment but the final sanction. I think I must have spanked my two sons a maximum of a half a dozen to a dozen times each in bringing them up and I can assure you that they did in fact misbehave more often than that! Neither of them is a little shrinking violet, both high spirited boys. The threat of a spank was usually enough to get them to behave. Most of the time getting them to sit on the stairs for five minutes was enough. As for talking to them, reasoning with them, children don't really understand abstract reasoning until thgey are about 11 or 12.
Finally, birthrates in Europe aren't plummetting because of the cost of raising children. European nations are all highly developed social welfare states, in other words the governments give you money to have children, help with rent, etc. Also, the amount of money available to the twenty-something who used to be the parents is staggering which is why most advertisers target this group. It's a question of priorities, what do you want to spend your money on, a pram or a Porshe. The real reason is the extended adolescence so many adults here fall into, where having to take responsibility for childcare cuts into your "me-time". Also, if you don't believe in God or anything past your own three score and ten you don't plan for the future, you just live for today.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home