Spanking may be linked to later mental disorders

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gift_from_God
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear mini_me640,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

It should be noted, dear friend, that many of the ‘baby boomer generation’ were in revolt against what they deemed to be the austere and hidebound ways of their parents era. They were a part of that “whole generation with a new explanation” nonsense of the 1960’s and so were in the vanguard of those pressing for radical social change and the abandonment of anything that had the slightest whiff of conventionality. Indeed, it would not be overstating things to say that they relished negating traditional values and absolutes.

Therefore, dear friend, that the baby boomer generation had been physically chastised by their parents was probably one of the factors that fuelled their determination to overthrow the traditional order by starting radical movements introducing revolutionary ideas. Obviously they would have had a revulsion against any strict discipline and traditional methods of child correction, including corporal punishment, as these would not have sat comfortably with their new-fangled opinions. Moreover, they would have also totally rejected the Christian teaching that children are born with wounded natures, disposed to wrongdoing, and thus must be rigorously corrected and kept under discipline, sometimes by means of physical chastisement when that is appropriate.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
I personally believe they were largely revolting against abuses of authority. They took it way too far in the other direction however. Just because authority is sometimes abused doesn’t mean there is no legitimate authority. At any rate, my point is that spanking didn’t stop the generation in question from moving down the path of “social degradation” as the other poster put it, so to say that lack of spanking is the cause of said “social degradation” doesn’t really add up.

I know that you are in the UK, so our frames of reference are different, just know that I of course am particularly speaking about the USA. Everyone always throws around the idea that people don’t use spanking anymore, and yet surveys of American parents show that the large majority have/do use spanking. Additionally, the socio-economic groups that use it the most are also the ones that have the highest crime rates for juveniles and adults. So clearly spanking is not the magic bullet of discipline that fixes all of children’s and society’s ills (I’m not saying that is anything you have said, I just get that implication from various people when this topic comes up). Obviously, there are many factors to the problems of Western society and it is a gross oversimplification to blame the use or lack of a single form of discipline for “societal degradation”. I do believe that lack of parental discipline in any consistent form is a major problem in our society, but I don’t believe there is any special power to using one form over another. I think failure to establish and consistently enforce boundaries is the main issue, much of which stems from tired, guilt-ridden parents of broken families.
 
I personally believe they were largely revolting against abuses of authority. They took it way too far in the other direction however. Just because authority is sometimes abused doesn’t mean there is no legitimate authority. At any rate, my point is that spanking didn’t stop the generation in question from moving down the path of “social degradation” as the other poster put it, so to say that lack of spanking is the cause of said “social degradation” doesn’t really add up.

I know that you are in the UK, so our frames of reference are different, just know that I of course am particularly speaking about the USA. Everyone always throws around the idea that people don’t use spanking anymore, and yet surveys of American parents show that the large majority have/do use spanking. Additionally, the socio-economic groups that use it the most are also the ones that have the highest crime rates for juveniles and adults. So clearly spanking is not the magic bullet of discipline that fixes all of children’s and society’s ills (I’m not saying that is anything you have said, I just get that implication from various people when this topic comes up). Obviously, there are many factors to the problems of Western society and it is a gross oversimplification to blame the use or lack of a single form of discipline for “societal degradation”. I do believe that lack of parental discipline in any consistent form is a major problem in our society, but I don’t believe there is any special power to using one form over another. I think failure to establish and consistently enforce boundaries is the main issue, much of which stems from tired, guilt-ridden parents of broken families.
Dear mini_me640,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Thankyou for your response above.

First, that the post-war generation were only reacting to the abuses of authority, dear friend, is an excuse that is sometimes made, but this was, you may recall, the anti-authoritarian ‘Age of Aquarius’ lot who were rising up in rebellion against almost anything that even smacked of authority. Besides, moral and cultural deterioration would have occured irrespective of whether or not that generation had been the recipients of corporal punishment. Other factors played a major part in societal degeneration, for example the invention of the contraceptive pill and the consequent permissive revolution, the coarsening of standards in the new media and hostile legislation. However, none of this addresses the issue as to whether physical correction is ordinarily an effective deterent in keeping wayward children on the straight and narrow path, as the wise Book of Proverbs long ago maintained.

The effectiveness of corporal punishment, dear friend, will, of course, be contingent very much on the context in which it is administered. If it is applied as a result of the parents reaching the end of their tether and when they have lost control, then it will probably be next to useless and the same would be the case if the parents had lashed out in desperation or even, God forbid, revenge. Sadly, many children are only ‘punished’ when their faults or wrongdoing become troublesome to an extremely stressed parent. Needless to say, the wrong sort of responses will, indeed, semaphore to the child that their parents are not in control and cannot cope. Now, if these are the circumstances in which physical correction occurs, then I can quite see why the wrong message is being sent to the child and why there may be issues with juvenile delinqency later, for they are coming from a background of very inadequate and even abusive parenting. However, dear friend, this is all poles apart from moderate chastisement, when called for, within the context of a loving home, and I believe that most reasonable men would appreciate that.

It is quite true, dear friend, that corporal punishment cannot be regarded as some sort of universal elixir for parental correction of children, nevertheless, it remains an effective tool in the behaviour modification of the young within a loving family environment. Most evidence points to the efficacious effects of the moderate use of physical chastisement in conjunction with consistency of discipline, affectionate (but not indulgent) relationships between parents and their children and parental vigilance over their children’s conduct. Indeed, unless one has been so heavily influenced by liberal ideology on child rearing, it admits of no doubt that corporal punishment is an integral and indispensable component in the character formation of the young.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
Sadly, many children are only ‘punished’ when their faults or wrongdoing become troublesome to an extremely stressed parent.
I think you nailed it.

If the parent spanks or if the parent does not, the child will be as successful as the parent’s dedication to raising the child.
 
OK, a few years ago, I was out shopping.
There was an older lady with a teenage daughter in the aisle, and I heard their voices getting a little louder. The daughter started mouthing off, and cursed at the mother.
The mother did not hesitate. She smacked the daughter straight away, then launched into a 5 minute tirade dressing down the daughter for her behavior, language, style of dress, friends, and the wisdom of violating clearly set out rules under a roof she does not own and pays for no part of.
Good! The daughter may have been embarrased, but how about the mother, being cursed at and mouthed off at by her daughter in public?
The only thing she could muster at the end was a meek and quiet ‘yes maam’.
Good–that is how she should have been addressing her mother from the beginning.
There was a stranger that tried to step in when the daughter was smacked.
The mother handled it with tact and speed. A very simple “step out of this gracefully, sonny. You want no part of this.”
His face reddened and he left…
That’s what he gets for trying to get involved when he (1) doesn’t know the background and (2) is not the parent.
And the lesson everyone learned that day…Sometimes it takes getting smacked in the head to see your errors.
👍
 
For what it’s worth, most developmental psychologists today believe that neither overly authoritarian parenting nor overly permissive (indulgent) parenting is the optimum parenting style for raising children. The best style of parenting for most children is authoritative, which includes love and warmth combined with firm discipline.
 
Parents are entitled to a different set of rules than their children.
Yes they are.

And I can find it in credibly funny that an adult is trying to teach a child that hitting is wrong by hitting that child. Especially if the adult can’t seem to understand why the child “isn’t getting it.” :rolleyes:
 
Yes they are.

And I can find it in credibly funny that an adult is trying to teach a child that hitting is wrong by hitting that child. Especially if the adult can’t seem to understand why the child “isn’t getting it.” :rolleyes:
It’s called do as I say, not as I do. :rolleyes: (considering you like to roll your eyes after your replies to other posters on this board)
 
I personally prefer not to be quick to judge other parents. I do not know their children or their particulars. I see no need for eye rolling at each other. We are all doing the best we can.
 
It’s called do as I say, not as I do. :rolleyes: (considering you like to roll your eyes after your replies to other posters on this board)
Do you really think a three year old gets that? The “do as I say, not as I do???”

Because I would think that would fall into the same category as trying to explain to a three year old why they shouldn’t have run into the street.
 
cbc.ca/news/health/story/2012/06/29/spanking-mental-health-drug-abuse.html

A civil conversation goes a long way, hitting someone doesn’t
A civil conversation goes a long way between people who are rational and open to changing their behaviour and opinion. Most children are not so, at least not all of the time, especially not when it counts - i.e. when they’re tempted to transgress. Of course unloading one’s anger on a child is evil, but thinking one can reason with all children all of the time is just as deluded.
 
Two things:
One, it bothers me to no end that the simple mention of a rod used thousands of years ago in a harsh, harsh time before child psychology (as a guidepost, take for instance that rape of children under three was legal and not considered harmful in any way, seeing as the hymen would regrow and not damage her chances for marriage)… that this mention of the kind of primitive discipline used would still be used to excuse what we know to be ineffective and damaging today…

Remember, the Bible also says, in Romans 2:4
Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?
and also, in Ephesians 6:4
Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.
and also, in Colossians 3:21
Fathers, do not exasperate your children, so that they will not lose heart.

Two, parents bear the responsibility to set their child up for success- to help them WANT and FEEL ABLE and BE ABLE TO meet their expectations. MANY, MANY parents have unrealistic expectations, development wise. Many parents do not communicate their expectations clearly. No parent can read their child’s mind… to assume the worst possible motivation for an action is uncharitable. As a rule, we should assume the best possible motivation CONSISTENT WITH THE FACTS. Unless you have already exasperated your children to the point that they have lost heart, they probably want very much to please you and to have a loving and respectful relationship with you. Now why did you need to spank again?

Love and Reason win the day. Sometimes we just need to reason with OURSELVES a little more, if the child is not yet capable.

OH, I LIED! A THIRD THING!
If there is even a shadow of a doubt that spanking might be damaging emotionally, psychologically, and or socially… isn’t it our responsibility as parents to shield our children from that possible (grave) risk, as much as we possibly can? Why do we defend our “right” to spank? Why not try and learn kind, gentle, and patient ways of instilling self discipline, of “bringing them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord”
 
Two things:
One, it bothers me to no end that the simple mention of a rod used thousands of years ago in a harsh, harsh time before child psychology (as a guidepost, take for instance that rape of children under three was legal and not considered harmful in any way, seeing as the hymen would regrow and not damage her chances for marriage)… that this mention of the kind of primitive discipline used would still be used to excuse what we know to be ineffective and damaging today…
Dear underthegrace,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

We have, dear friend, no intimation within the N.T. that the corporal punishment of children is harsh and inconsistent with the Gospel and the whole tenor of the Christian religion. On the contrary, it appears to be taken for granted in the Pauline epistles and the epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 12: 9-10). At any rate, we find no formal abrogation, which one would expect if corporal punishment was deemed to be at variance with the new ethos of the Gospel age, yet the apostles do not forbid its use in either their writings or public preaching. Moreover, it is surely imperative that we distinguish between the temporary ceremonial and ritualistic laws of the Jews in the O.T. and perpetually valid teaching that remains unaffected with the passage of time.

Modern child psychology, dear friend, has been anything but a good or reliable “guidepost” for parents and has actually caused much harm to children with its crazily riddiculous theories on child rearing/discipline. Physical chastisement of children will never cease to be a necessary and vital component of child discipline, since children in every age will require reproof and correction, so long as they are born with that guilty twist called Original Sin. True, it is not the only form of child correction at parents disposal, as I have said previously in this thread, but it is an important and indispensable one for keeping wayward children on the straight and narrow path.

It seems a jolly reasonable assertion, dear friend, that if God did not consider the corporal punishment of children to be an intrinsically unworthy method of child discipline in the O.T. epoch, then how could He suddenly change His mind respecting an issue of such grave importance with the coming of the Gospel? To do so would surely be evidence of something capricious in the divine character, for there is no logical reason for any change since children have not changed, being still conceived in sin with same old bias towards wrongdoing. What has changed is the secular opinions of our godless culture, which owe their origin to liberal ideology that is hostile to our most holy religion. We need, dear friend, to be very cautious that our decision making is not being informed and influenced by the zany thinking of the child development ‘experts’ and their maudlin notions as to what they deem to be the correct and more humane methods of behavoural modification.

In its commentary on the Fourth Commandment our Catechism actually references Proverbs 13: 24 - “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him” (see para. 2223), by which the Church appears to sanction the continued use of physical chastisement. Neither the N.T. or Church doctrine on the rearing of children specifically prescribe or prohibit the use of corporal punishment, but passively acknowledge it as an option to enforce discipline - perhaps a pastoral silence implies consent. Be that as it may, dear friend, the corporal punishment of children involves a timeless principle that has perpetual validity for Catholic parents today, which cannot be discounted on the basis of unsound emotional child psychology theory.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
Two things:
One, it bothers me to no end that the simple mention of a rod used thousands of years ago in a harsh, harsh time before child psychology (as a guidepost, take for instance that rape of children under three was legal and not considered harmful in any way, seeing as the hymen would regrow and not damage her chances for marriage)…
Source?
Quite frankly, I do not believe you are telling the truth.
Please provide backing for this conjecture that rape was considered NOT harmful in any way, and that it was accepted.
that this mention of the kind of primitive discipline used would still be used to excuse what we know to be ineffective and damaging today…
Source again.
Perhaps read the thread. It would appear it has not harmed a number of people contributing to the thread.
Remember, the Bible also says, in Romans 2:4
Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?
Taken in context, I am still uncertain what this has to do with the topic at hand.
and also, in Ephesians 6:4
Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.
As opposed to “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is just.” Located just a few verses earlier.
and also, in Colossians 3:21
Fathers, do not exasperate your children, so that they will not lose heart.
And the verse preceding it specifies: “Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing to the Lord.”
Can you point out where specifically it specifies specific that we should not spank?
I can find where it does specify corporal punishment.
 
It is perfectly possible to inflict grievous psychological harm upon a child without using physical force of any kind, via tongue lashing, standing in the corner, etc.

Conversely, it is possible to spank in a wise manner and not inflict harm.

I’d say the weight of history overweighs “modern psychology”.

ICXC NIKA
 
It is perfectly possible to inflict grievous psychological harm upon a child without using physical force of any kind, via tongue lashing, standing in the corner, etc.

Conversely, it is possible to spank in a wise manner and not inflict harm.

I’d say the weight of history overweighs “modern psychology”.

ICXC NIKA
Dear GEddie,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Jolly well said and splendid observations. Thankyou for that (name removed by moderator)ut, dear friend.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
It is perfectly possible to inflict grievous psychological harm upon a child without using physical force of any kind, via tongue lashing, standing in the corner, etc.

Conversely, it is possible to spank in a wise manner and not inflict harm.

I’d say the weight of history overweighs “modern psychology”.

ICXC NIKA
Dear GEddie,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Jolly well said and splendid observations. Thankyou for that (name removed by moderator)ut, dear friend.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
 
Dear GEddie,

Cordial greetings and a very good day. Jolly well said and splendid observations. Thankyou for that (name removed by moderator)ut, dear friend.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax
YVW, mon ami.

ICXC NIKA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top