To spank or not to spank, that is the question

[Black_Jaque]

He then avoids disobeying you in order to avoid pain. He does not seek to obey you because it is the right thing to do. He avoids disobedience.

And for a small child, that is enough.

I’ve been going by just what comes intuitively, and whaddaya know, I rarely spank my 8 yr-old. He’s hit the age of reason and other things seem to work just fine. He goes to confession, and constantly drills me with questions to discern his sinful behaviors. He’s very motivated to do the right thing.

Artificial consequences indeed. It’s a real hand and a real behind, and it really hurts. I suppose the “real” consequence of playing in the street would be to let them get run over by a car!

 

[Chip_D]

I have one child and have been a Montessori teacher for the last 9 years. I am also an orthodox Catholic. While I have read good arguments for spanking I have never found it necessary, nor have I found arguments that were good enough. When I look at the parents that I respect the most, it seems as though they are firm and kind with their children, and show the children a great deal of respect while still maintaining a healthy parental authority. I really believe that it is our job as parents to teach our children to learn to think for themselves, not just obey. Obedience is important, but the children must trust the adult in orderly to be truly obedient. Unfortunately, all too often I find that most families that use spanking do so during power struggles. That does not breed trust and respect. The key is not to get into the power struggle in the first place. There are many good parenting books that will tell you how to do that. I think one of the most important factors in making this kind of decision is to look to the families that you respect the most (not just in how the parents behave, but how the children behave), and ask them. Respect breeds respect.

 

[Black_Jaque]

I really believe that it is our job as parents to teach our children to learn to think for themselves, not just obey.

We agree. However, I would say that is precisely why children do not leave the house at age 7. We’ve got another 11 years to work on this, that is if it hasn’t even started yet. You can spank and teach them to think for themselves at the same time.

Unfortunately, all too often I find that most families that use spanking do so during power struggles.

Huh? Power struggles? Is this more psychobabble? I’d say any parent who weighs more than 100 lbs and is having a “power struggle” with a 30 lb two-year old has got some SERIOUS problems.

 

[hasikelee]

Ham1:

Dobson has a completely distorted view of the human person. He views the body as evil and the will of the child as something evil that must be overcome. He sees no problem with masturbation and advocates contraception as a good thing.

Now it seems to me that anyone who can hold those positions has NO CLUE as to the truth of the human person. Why on earth would anyone take advice on discipline from a man who has an utterly perverted view of what a child is?

You make a good point and I agree with you, but I also DID learn helpful/interesting aspects of effectively teaching and discplining children from reading his book.

His book calls for careful discernment and comparison next to the truth of our humanity, but you can gleam the “good parts” while dismissing the “bad parts.”

 

[The_Rigbys]

SteveG:

The rod/staff in OT times can also be seen to represent the rod/staff of the shepard. Such a rod isn’t used to beat the sheep, but rather to gently nudge and guide them in the right direction.

This might well be true in Psalm 23. Overall, though, it’s a red herring. For instance, Prov. 23:13-14 says:

Withhold not chastisement from a boy; if you beat him with the rod, he will not die. Beat him with the rod, and you will save him from the nether world. (Douay-Rheims)

Do not be chary of correcting a child, a stroke of the cane is not likely to kill him. A stroke of the cane and you save him from Sheol. (Jerusalem Bible)

As you said earlier, this is pretty unequivocal. And yet, “Parenting With Grace” claims that the “rod” in this passage might not refer to corporal punishment, but rather to some sort of measuring device. This is reminiscent of those teetotalers who say that the wedding guests at Cana were drinking grape juice.

Mr. Popcak also implies that there are only two references to corporal punishment in the whole OT (the above, & Sirach 30:1-3). What a howler! There are many more. For instance, in 2 Samuel 7:14, the Lord says to Nathan:

I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son: and if he commit any iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men.

(Or do the “rod” and “stripes” refer to something else – such as the father taking away his son’s candy cane?)

Maybe Mr. P realizes that he’s on shaky ground, since he quickly changes the subject to, “Why the OT concept of punishment is no longer valid in our era.” He bases his argument on the story of the Prodigal Son, which isn’t particularly relevant, IMO. First of all, the son wasn’t a little child; he was old enough to leave home and indulge in “loose living”. Secondly, by the time he repented and came home, he’d already suffered the consequences of his actions (near-starvation). There was no need for him to be “taught a lesson,” as he’d already learned it.

I have similar problems with many of the book’s other arguments. (“Would you spank Jesus?” Well, no. I wouldn’t give him a time-out, either. The point being?) Out of all the questionable material in the book, though, I think this statement takes the cake:

God’s supernatural and natural truths cannot conflict. It is predictable, then, that modern psychology and the tenets of the Catholic faith are utterly harmonious on the subject of discipline. (p. 356)



As Mr. P might put it: “Holy leap in logic, Batman!”

If Chesterton were still alive, he’d know what to say about this. (He probably has, for that matter. There were plenty of psychologists giving “authoritative advice” in his day. They just didn’t happen to be promoting attachment parenting.)

 

[Fitz]

This topic will go on for years. It was about 30 years ago, when I studied Early Childhood Education in college that I learned never to spank. The philosophy was never to model a behavior that you didn’t approve of in them. It sounded good, brilliant in fact. I told my mom then (mother of 7 and spanked us all when we did something she considered severe) that I would **never ** spank my children. The heated discussion followed.

When I began having my own children I was armed with having read many books on proper parenting. They are all outdated now so I won’t recommend them. Positive reinforcement loomed large. By and large that is what I still like to say is best.

However, remember the warning to **never **say never? So true. I did spank my kids, but very very little. In fact, almost never. I think having read up on all the things that I have heard all of you describe: time out, time away, diversion (for the real young ones), talking, reasoning (for the older ones), and my personal favorite- POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT.

Good luck. I do take the Spare the rod and spoil the child reference to mean all discipline and not just spanking or hitting.

The best thing I did learn in college although I laugh at most of it now about parenting is that often times when we hit or spank it is addressing our anger and not the child’s behavior. Make the punishment fit the crime. Actions have consequences. Spill milk, clean it up with no anger involved at all. Throw your toys, pick them up…on and on.

Mean what you say, and say what you mean. Parenting is a long road and good luck to you. If you ever have a very strong willed child and need help with your discipline strategies or think your anger is over the top, get help before you hurt anyone.

 

[Anonymous]

The correct answer is…(IMHO), never spank the child. It’s usually the parents who need the spanking.

 

[The_Rigbys]

Fitz:

The best thing I did learn in college although I laugh at most of it now about parenting is that often times when we hit or spank it is addressing our anger and not the child’s behavior.

This is an excellent point. It’s important to keep in mind the ultimate purpose of discipline. It’s not to get our children to stop irritating us. Nor, in the long run, is it primarily to keep them from physical harm. It’s to train them in virtue, and help them get to heaven. :getholy:

By the way, in case the original poster hasn’t read Fr. (now Msgr.) George Kelly’s classic, “The Catholic Family Handbook,” it’s available online:

ewtn.com/library/FAMILY/FAMHNDBK.TXT

Here’s a relevant quotation.

What offenses call for physical punishment? In the view of most experts, very few. However, reasonable corporal punishment, sparingly used, can be more effective than some educators like to admit. …] The very young child measures good and bad in terms of his own pleasure and pain, and since most of his experiences are still on a physical level, physical punishment has its place. But wherever possible, love and affection should hold the foremost position.

 

[jess7396]

I am curious of those who keep speaking of “the rod”, do YOU actually beat your children with rods? I ask b/c that is the quote you are using to justify hitting your child’s bottom or hand with your hand (or for some a switch ), I am just curious if you are actually doing it b/c it is scripturally mandated, why aren’t you beating them with a rod?

I have chosen to take my style of discipline (or at least what I try for ) from Christ’s example of dealing with people, not from the OT. But, that’s just me.

FTR- just b/c some people said they would never spank, and then did, does not mean everyone will- I think you can say “NEVER” and stick to it, and I know many families who have done just that. Clearly, if you said “never”, and then did it, your view on spanking changed to making it acceptable, there are other parents out there who will not have a shift in thinking on this one.

 

[jc413]

Jess wrote, “I am curious of those who keep speaking of “the rod”, do YOU actually beat your children with rods?..I am just curious if you are actually doing it b/c it is scripturally mandated, why aren’t you beating them with a rod?”

Jess, I assume your point in the above quote is that as Catholics, we do not take a literal view of scripture, and thus should not be taking the references to corporal punishment in the Bible literally (because obviously no one here is beating their children with rods). Good point, and one that I have thought of often in this argument. As I see it, one can definitely read these Biblical passages on a metaphorical level. But one is certainly justified in stating that scripture encourages the use of corporal punishment. We are not talking about one or two isolated references to scripture here.

After having read and re-read and RE-read the arguments that Popcak presents, I still fail to see how he has completely made his case. I am not looking for loopholes. I am just really trying to understand his point, and frankly, I don’t agree with everything he says. I can certainly see his case for not spanking based on a metaphorical interpretation of scripture. However, I cannot see how he has proven that spanking is wrong. The evidence is simply not there, Biblically speaking. One can make the argument that scripture doesn’t mandate corporal punishment. But one cannot make the argument that scripture does not support and thus condemns corporal punishment.

 

[jc413]

Just a few more thoughts…As the wife of the original poster, I have read each one of these posts. I have read Popcak’s book, listened to Steve Wood’s tapes, listened and read Dr. Guarendi, read Dobson’s books, read excerpts of Dr. Sears, and just about anything else I could get my hands on. So I believe I am getting a pretty good idea of both sides of the argument here.

Some unfair accusations have been made against both camps. First, many of those in the “pro-spanking” camp have insinuated that the non-spankers are taking a wishy-washy way out of parenting. Not true. Popcak’s method is MUCH more involved, thought-out and detailed than simply “don’t spank.” There is so much more to it than that.

On the other hand, those in the non-spanking camp have accused those who spank of only teaching their children external discipline. Again, not true. If one were to spank their children for each and every infraction, without ever taking the time to “teach” their children, then the accusation that they were teaching external discipline would hold water.

Many of the non-spankers have asked the question, “If you can discipline a child without spanking, then why do it?” This is a good question, and one I have also given a lot of thought to. In my personal opinion, I think SOME people can certainly discipline their children without spanking. I know of several wonderful parents who have done this. However, I have come to the conclusion that it takes a certain temperament for one to be able to “gently” parent a child in this manner – one that, unfortunately, not all of us have. Also, it is often the case that those who spank and those who do not have different expectations from their children. I am not saying “right” or “wrong” expectations. I simply say “different.”

 

[Black_Jaque]

I think one should consider the “nature” of the parent(s).

Discipline without spanking in my family just doesn’t work. At the time my children are misbehaving I simply don’t have the creative energy or time to come up with some alternative. I often don’t know myself what they should do instead.

I’ve found that if they refuse to wash the dishes, sitting in the corner is more desireable to them than doing dishes. Just sit in the corner long enough and someone else will do the dishes.

I’ve found that for many infractions, I cannot extend punishments to last very long. I forget. If I tell them no privileges in early afternoon, by late evening I’ve forgotten all about it.

I am one who can maintain some control through my emotions. Even if I’m angry, I do not fear that my spanking will escalate into a severe beating.

If you follow according to your internal nature, parenting will be easier.

I realize that I’m modeling spanking. And I fully accept that if the situation warrants, my children will hit. I’ve got 18 years to teach them the subtlties of “situation warrants”.

Once again, as Jamie noted - it’s not like if you do spank that’s all you do. I’m usually bristling with weapons: time outs, grounding, no sweets, no toys, extra chores, no friends, *spanking, *nasty looks, scowls, lectures, cold showers (if they take too long).

If you attempt to take away ANY of my tools you’re in for a fight.

Also, equally valuable are the rewards for good behavior. Toys, treats, extra liberty, extra time, reading books, hugs, tickling, winks of approval, playful nooggies, playing with Papa, camping out on the living room floor, and piggy-back rides.

 

[perpetua]

We spank… for extreme disobedience. It is not, however, the first thing that is done, and it is not done often. We spank only if the children persist in something that they have been warned more than once about. Perhaps it is that we expect more respect and instant obedience than others, but we have noticed amongst our family and aquaintances with children, that without exception in our experience, those children of parents who do not believe in spanking tend to be much more rude to adults, disobedient in general, and rude to other children… If they do obey, there tends to be a great deal of whining and back-talk… Just our observations…

 

[Makerteacher]

jc413:

I am in the middle of Popcak’s book, and I am still learning here. This is why my husband brought up the topic in the first place. Although I believe there are many, many valuable tools in that book, I simply don’t agree with everything that is said, but I have heard from too many Protestants and want to know how orthodox Catholics parent as well. Popcak asserts that the method he advocates, the “gentle method,” is the Catholic way to parent. We wanted to know how others felt on this topic

Jamie, excellent thread. I have to say that I disagreed with a lot of the Popcak book, and also agreed with a lot of it. Like everything else, you have to form your own conscience on this. It has been my experience that people who think they have THE answer have only understood part of the question. So I take issue with Popcak’s assertion that his is “THE Catholic way to parent”.

Popcak has two children, I think? I have five, and have fostered several others. EVERY CHILD is different and “THE” answer doesn’t always fit every child. (If both of his kids are like my eldest and youngest, spanking would indeed have never occured. I’d love to see him raise my middle three without spanking, however. )

 

[Makerteacher]

jc413:

Also, please note that there is a grave difference between “hitting” and “spanking.”

Amen and amen! In our home, spankings were rare, but the kids knew they were a possibility. Usually by the time they were 5 or 6, spankings were no longer necessary because they knew we meant business. It has been literally years since I have spanked a child, and my youngest is 11. My oldest is almost 17.

We insisted on “first time obedience”, a concept I think we learned from the Gary Ezzo series, Growing Kids God’s Way, which I can recommend only with strong reservations. It had a few gems that we loved, like first time obedience and 80% compliance rules, and the interrupt rule (which I LOVE) but a lot that we threw out.

Spankings were NEVER the only form of discipline we used, and spankings were ALWAYS conducted according to certain rules:

1. Mom or Dad is calm and in control. In some cases this meant spankings had to be delayed for hours at a time, or eliminated altogether.
2. Spankings are never done in front of other people, period.
3. The child knows exactly why they are being spanked, what rule they broke, and how they will be expected handle it next time
4. NO bare skin
5. Spankings in our home were only on the fanny, no legs or hands or whatever
   6.Four swats, the end.

Logical consequences are what we’ve used most of the time, after they have reached the age of reason. Misuse your phone priveleges and you lose the use of the phone entirely, for example. Forget to do your chores and your bedtime cranks up to 7 PM regardless of your age. Etc. When they were smaller, during the "trench"years as my husband used to say, talking to them was great but we usually had to either remove them from the situation physically, or physically stop them from doing something, i.e., hitting your baby sister on the head with a book.

What worked for my first child did not so much as faze my second, nor my third, though it worked great on my fourth. My fifth child almost never needs ANY discipline: my third needs it constantly even today. Who can say why?

It behooves us all to remember that every single child is different, even within the same family, and what works for me might or might not work for you. Let us be charitable.

 

[SteveG]

The Rigbys:

Maybe Mr. P realizes that he’s on shaky ground, since he quickly changes the subject to, “Why the OT concept of punishment is no longer valid in our era.” He bases his argument on the story of the Prodigal Son…

Whether his example was a good one or not, the fact that we are NOT to use only the OT as our model for such things is relavent. Isn’t it interesting that the scripture quotes in support of corporal punishment all come from the OT. Why none from the NT? Because we now live in the new covenant that Christ established for us. In that covenant in which the example is selflessness to the point of the cross…

• The New Testament overwhelmingly rejects retributive justice in dealing with offenders.
• The New Testament is overwhelmingly committed to the beauty, sanctity, innocence and life-giving character of children.
• The New Testament is overwhelmingly committed to love (as opposed to punitive action) as both the means and the end of all human relationships.
  
  …How about if we start stoning adultresses again (and no, I am not implying spanking is equivelant to stoning, just making a point)? But Christ explains things anew and gives as a better example. ‘Let him who is without sin cast the first stone’.

The Rigbys:

I have similar problems with many of the book’s other arguments. (“Would you spank Jesus?”…)

The point being that the ‘man’ Christ was the new Adam. What we should have been had we not fallen. What we as redeemed man are supposed to be striving towards. We as parents bear a particular responsibility in helping our children achieve that goal. The point being that it is not in keeping with our dignity as people, who are redeemed brothers and sisters of Christ to be treated otherwise.

We certainly deserve far less than we recieve from God. If he were to treat us how we deserve, we’d be hopeless. But in fact he treats us as if we are already worth something, and then loves us into being real men and women. Should we not model that love from God to our children?
The Rigbys:

Out of all the questionable material in the book, though, I think this statement takes the cake:
God’s supernatural and natural truths cannot conflict. It is predictable, then, that modern psychology and the tenets of the Catholic faith are utterly harmonious on the subject of discipline.

I think you read far too much into this. I read this as simply stating that the tenets of the faith don’t contradict this style of parenting, without condemning or even saying anything further about other styles. But hey, it let you ridicule his writing style, so it’s OK that you misrepresented it.

 

[SteveG]

jc413:

However, I have come to the conclusion that it takes a certain temperament for one to be able to “gently” parent a child in this manner – one that, unfortunately, not all of us have.

AND
Black Jaque:

I think one should consider the “nature” of the parent(s).
Discipline without spanking in my family just doesn’t work. At the time my children are misbehaving I simply don’t have the creative energy or time to come up with some alternative. I often don’t know myself what they should do instead.

And what is in essence being said here (whether realized or not), is that this is about the parent, not the child. If the same outcome (good discipline) is achievable either way, the answer as to why one must use corporal punishment now seems to finally be clear. It’s because ‘**I **(the figurative I) just can’t do it the ‘gentle’ way.’ I hate to be so blunt, and know some of you won’t like it, but it’s the logical extension of what was stated above. If that’s the case, it seems that it would be encumbant on the parent to work on fixing their temperament to allow them to do so. I know that’s easier said than done, but it would seem to be the goal nonetheless.

 

[SteveG]

Makerteacher:

Popcak has two children, I think? I have five, and have fostered several others. EVERY CHILD is different and “THE” answer doesn’t always fit every child. (If both of his kids are like my eldest and youngest, spanking would indeed have never occured. I’d love to see him raise my middle three without spanking, however. )

I am pretty certain he has four. A good friend of mine has 6 and doesn’t spank, I only have two so far (one of which is as strong willed as they come), I am acquaintences with a family with 7 grown who were never spanked, etc., etc… Sorry, numbers are irrelavent here. Each side can throw out big families which have done it both ways with similar results.

 

[riabia]

-Popczak has 2 kids-

Anyway-
our daughter is only 13 months old so spanking is not currently an issue. Both my husband and I believe that spanking is one of many options in our parenting arsenal, although definately not a primary one. I have read Popczak, Sears, Guarendi, Dobson, Ezzo, as well as several other parenting books. I think that each parent needs to take what each author has to say and glean whatever advice they feel will work for their family. Every family is different, and within every family, each child is different. We each need to respect each other’s philosophies and pray that the route we choose will mold our children into respectable, Godly adults.

Peace in Christ,
Maria

 

[SteveG]

-Popczak has 2 kids-

I stand corrected. I researched this and indeed he has 2 children. The point I made still stands. Numbers are irrelavent.