Strollerderby : spanking

When Spanking Is Outlawed, Only Outlaws (American and Somali) Will Spank!

Kate Tuttle — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:31:00 GMT

Last week I wrote about the death of an Indian schoolgirl due to corporal punishment, which got me reading about corporal punishment rules worldwide, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), an international treaty that has been signed by 193 of the world's countries -- that's every member of the United Nations save two. Guess who hasn't signed it yet? The United States -- along with that bastion of human rights, Somalia.

This week conservative parenting guru John Rosemond had an editorial in the Washington Times about how the US needs to stand strong against signing the UNCRC, because he feels it would erode the rights of parents. Because there's been an influx of new political pressure to sign the treaty now that Obama's in office (clearly Bush was never going to sign it), he urges readers to seek more information and then to "call or write to your senators and let them know how you would like them to vote should ratification come to the Senate floor. Given that ours is still a government of, for and by the people, let us pray that the people make themselves heard!"

Shockingly enough, I totally agree. But first, read more about the UNCRC and figure out what you want to tell them when you call. If you are eager to preserve your right to spank your child, you may urge them to vote no, when and if it comes up. But first read it yourself; you may find that you like what it has to say. A sampling, and this is what I found when visiting the site Rosemond himself recommends, a site opposed to the UNCRC:

Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.
Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.
A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.
According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.
Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.
Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.

This is meant to be scary stuff! But to me -- and to the people of Canada, Mexico, England, Australia, all of Western Europe, all of Africa, all of South and Central America, etc. -- it sounds pretty reasonable. Clearly numbers 4, 5, and 7 are kind of red herring-ish (we have a busy enough court system as it is). But just as clearly Rosemond and his ilk find it scary to contemplate a nation in which children are free from physical punishment, free to choose their own religion, and free to learn about sex, science, and other religions -- not to mention one which supports children's welfare with more than just rhetoric.

Sounds like a country that truly would leave no child behind. What a huge step forward it would be if we could join the rest of the world in that goal.

The Guy's Kind Of A Jerk, But He's Got a Point

More by this author:

They Say: Bilingual Babies Learn Better

Why Are We So Shocked When Women Kill?

(Public) Breastfeeding Now Legal in Massachusetts

Another Hospital Baby Mix-Up, Now With Added Racism!

Do You Speak Up When You See a Child Hit in Public?

JeanneSager — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:31:00 GMT

Every April, I get that old Edmund Burke quote stuck in my head: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Or something to that effect.

April is Child Abuse Prevention Month, the time when child protection groups across the country start beating that drum again. Speak up, speak up, speak UP when you see something.

Except, I am not that parent. I have a hard time walking up to the mother in the grocery store who has smacked their child across the face and saying, "Hey, lady, knock it off."

I'm more the indignant glare type, the one who will cut you down with my eyes, dark and forbidding from across the dairy aisle, running my cart perilously close to your heels. "I'm watching you," I say with my elbows as I get too close while we're both picking through the tomato pile.

And yet, I am not a proponent of child abuse (is anyone?). I am not even a spanker, preferring to discipline with words and timeouts in part because of my own history of beatings on the butt which left their emotional scars. Nor am I the quiet type. I frankly have a hard time shutting up about most things - hence the blogging job!

So why is it so hard to speak up about child abuse? For one, there's a fine line between outright abuse and a bad day. We've all been horrified by seeing a parent smack a kid, but who knows if that was a heat of the moment, having an awful day, never, ever happened before kind of thing or a normal occurrence in that family's life? We're too afraid of disrupting an otherwise normal family's life with an investigation by child protective services.

There's also a fear that our own closets aren't without their skeletons. Ever been locked out by your toddler? Check. Ever lost your toddler - even for just five seconds - because they wandered off while you were focusing on something else? Again, check. Ever left your child in the car for a second while you ran into the post office? One more time.

So we adopt the "he who is without sin" method of casting stones. We're not perfect, so who are we to judge? Although, we do judge. We glare. We huff. We go home and tell our spouses about the idiot we saw in the grocery store. We are aware that something might not be right, but by and large we are too afraid to do anything.

It's all in degrees, naturally. If I saw a baby sleeping in a backseat on a ninety-degree day with no adult in sight, you know I'd be on my cell phone to 911. If I saw a child battered and bruised with a split lip and a black eye, I'd be calling child protective services. Waiting until it gets to clear child abuse carries with it its risks - we aren't PREVENTING child abuse if we wait that long. We aren't protecting the nearly one million victims of child abuse every year, almost ninety-five percent of whom are abused more than once.

It's where that Burke quote comes into play. We are good parents, but we let bad parents win.

I've done it. You've done it.

Will you be speaking up next time?

Image: ChildAbusePreventionNetwork

Does Madonna Spank Her Kids?

Brett Singer — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:00:00 GMT

Somewhat buried in the news about Madonna's adopted son David Banda meeting up with his biological father in Malawi was this little tidbit (this is David's dad Yohane talking about his chat with David):

He told me his mum likes riding horses and that he too rides horses. Then he told me a story when one day he and his brother, Rocco, rode horses and fell. He told me his mum spanked him because they are not supposed to ride horses on their own. (Emphasis added)

Whoa, Nellie! Hang on a minute. Madonna spanked him?

Well, maybe. When I first saw this, Shannon pointed out that sometimes little kids exaggerate. I've never hit either of my children but my oldest once informed someone that I had. Somewhat out of the blue, I might add. Luckily it was a person who was inclined to take my word for it (a relative). But if it had been a teacher, I don't know how that would have gone over.

Still, it's interesting to think about. Do you think Madonna spanks her kids? Or maybe she has the nanny do it? Or is David just a little kid exaggerating?

Source: PerezHilton

Homebirthing Advocate's Baby Dies During Homebirth

Another Country Joins the Ban Against Corporal Punishment

Madonna/Angelina Dichotomy: Why is Adoption Okay for One Star but not the Other?

Peeper Madness - Supeep Court

Texas School Accused Of Student Cage Fighting

Jimmy Kimmel And The Octomom

Dad Abused Kids For Finding His Porn

Kate Tuttle — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:31:00 GMT

In a bizarre, sad case out of Tampa, police say that a father of three kids, aged eight, nine and ten, physically abused them to teach them a lesson for various infractions, including finding his hidden porn stash. (As one of my colleagues points out, isn't finding your father's porn punishment in itself?) In addition to beating his children, Moslim Al-Assadi is accused of holding his daughter's head under water as she struggled to breathe.

Local police have long known about the family, but their ability to respond was hampered by conflicting stories told by the children themselves, who have shown a pattern familiar to psychologists but frustrating for law enforcement: as frightened and scarred as they are by the abuse, the children defend their father.

From the St. Petersburg Times:

Deputies went to Oak Grove Elementary School to interview the children, who again spoke of spankings, slappings and the oldest daughter's submersion.

"She said that she recalls telling someone about this before but told them she was lying because she (did) not want her father taken away," police wrote. "She said she knows what he did was wrong. He told her he loved her no matter what she did."

Such protection by children, even in the face of abuse, isn't uncommon, said one psychologist.

"Children who have experienced abuse have a heightened need for the comfort and security" that parents can provide, said Lauren Fasig, the director of research at the University of Florida's Fredric G. Levin College of Law Center on Children and Families. "This need may outweigh the perceived threat."

It's not surprising that these three children would lie to protect their father -- their mother, Arlene Heintzelman, with whom they have only supervised visits, has also been accused of neglect, including an instance in which two of the kids fell from a second-story window. Left to navigate life without even one stable, caring parent, they are clearly doing the best they can. Let's hope the authorities are able to help them find the peace, security and love they deserve.

More by this author:

Exploited and Discarded? Seeking Protection for Egg Donors

Another Hospital Baby Mix-Up, Now With Added Racism!

Spurred to Action by Natasha Richardson Death, Parents Save Girl

Child Support Suffers in a Recession, Too

Toddlers Whose Parents Hit Have More Trouble Sleeping

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:30:00 GMT

I’m hoping it won’t surprise you to learn that a three-year study of 4,600 toddlers has concluded that children whose parents hit or yell at them are more likely to have trouble sleeping. It doesn't take an expert to realize that a quick slap and a screamed threat are not exactly relaxing.

What is surprising is that the Australian pediatrician who led the study is arguing that there is no way to know whether aggressive parenting causes sleeping problems, or if toddlers who are cranky and overtired cause their parents to be more hostile."It's always a cause-and-effect argument and you can't really conclude from this which occurs first," said Dr. Harriet Hiscock.

Call me naïve, but I kinda thought it was common knowledge that, “He made me do it!” is not a justifiable excuse for violence—particularly when the “he” is a toddler. Furthermore, the study—which examined sleeping habits when children were one-year-old, and then again two years later—found that “mothers' parenting style was not a big factor in sleep problems at the age of one, but became an issue by the second study.”

Hmmm, I wonder if the inability to fall asleep that these kids developed over time had anything to do with living with the constant stress of parents who frequently lose their tempers….

Photo: Hank van Stuivenberg/Sydney Morning Herald

Another Country Bans Spanking

Judge to Mom: Spank Your Kid or Pay Up

JeanneSager — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:22:00 GMT

A judge who ordered parents to paddle their children with a wooden board in an open courtroom or face hefty fines has been warned his mode of punishment is not acceptable by a Texas judicial conduct panel.

Well Gawd bless those Texans for some common sense.

Judge Gustavo Garza has told parents of truant children they would have to pay as much as $500 if they didn't take a board, labeled "board of education" and spank their kids. One dad is suing, saying he reluctantly paddled his stepdaughter, only to have Garza tell him he hadn't hit her hard enough.

Since when does a judge get to advocate violence to prove a point? Because even the pro-spanking crowd has to admit that telling a parent to hit their child with a paddle - and to hit "harder" is something intended to inflict pain.

As Hannah pointed out recently, in all fifty states, it is legal for parents to hit, spank, paddle, or whip their children. Legal, but not required. Just like I can't be compelled to raise my child a Catholic or a Jew or force her to eat meat or not, I can't be forced to use spanking as my form of discipline.

One lawyer likened Garza's courtroom to something out the Jerry Springer Show, and I'd tend to agree. The idea of the law sneaking into parents' homes makes me uncomfortable, and I admit a slight hesitancy in supporting the concept of an anti-spanking law - because I've worried how far-reaching it can go. But when the opposite is in affect, when a judge forces a parent to hit their child, using the force of the law, we're right up there with the countries that practice torture.

What happened to Amendment 8 of the Constitution? You know, the one that says judges shall not call for "cruel or unusual punishments" for criminals? Maybe it's time to take Judge Garza over our knee and show him what it's liked to be punished for abusing his power.

Source/Image: MomLogic

Another Country Bans Spanking

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:55:00 GMT

The Philippines is on the verge of outlawing all forms of physical punishment against children, with legislators arguing that children have the same right to be free from violence as adults.

The bill’s sponsors have also cited studies that show that physical punishment does not improve children’s behavior in the long term. Violence will stop the misbehavior in the moment, but over time it simply increases a child’s silent distrust of his guardian and therefore his tendency to act out.

Parents who rely on spanking or hitting often argue that it simply keeps their kids in line and does not constitute abuse. (These were the same arguments used to defend "wife hitting" until the 1960s.) But there is no way to tell what long-term effects hitting will have on a child. Children who are the victims of corporal punishment are more likely to disrespect authority, to be unusually aggressive, and to end up in jail. Of course, kids are resilient and many people who were hit as children grow into healthy adults. But there is simply no reason to risk instilling deeply rooted anger, aggression, and emotional distancing in a child.

These are the same commonsense arguments behind many European countries’ ban of corporal punishment in the schools and at home. Tragically, the United States lags far behind other industrialized countries in protecting the rights of children. It is the only U.N. nation other than Somalia that refuses to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. In all 50 states, it is legal for parents to hit, spank, paddle, or whip their children. In 23 states, corporal punishment is legal in public schools. And in every single state except for Minnesota, it is legal for parents accused of child abuse to evoke their right to corporal punishment in their defense.

And we wonder why teens believe it was all right for Chris Brown to express his anger at Rihanna by beating her up.

Image: Scoop

Why Teens Are Quick to Blame Rihanna

25 Things That Make Me Feel Like a Bad Mom

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:05:00 GMT

Caron Guillo, over at New Christian Voices, has taken ahold of the omnipresent Facebook meme 25 Random Things About Me, and given it a parental guilt trip spin. Apparently it's not only Babble writers who like to bare (and implicitly kinda defend) their (supposed) parental deficits to the Internet.

I'm glad to see that at least some "new" Christian voices have a sense of humor. That's a refreshing change from certain spokespeople for Jesus's followers, even if I still personally find something creepy about the glee with which Guillo describes spanking her kids with a wooden spoon.

I confess to having been a closet fan of the 25 Random Things meme. Because it was so open-ended I found it was really good at giving me a sneak peak into people's self-images and what they found important (and how well they could gauge what other people would find interesting about them, which was information itself). This version looks to be no different. (Hand me downs apparently make some people feel like bad moms. Huh. They make me feel like a good mom.)

Anyhow, I figured I'd play.

Here's Caron's list.

Here's mine:

We cut my daughter's hair short to avoid fights over combing it.
Last time we did so, we cut off what was basically a dreadlock, shaped like a fiddlehead.
I'm avoiding scheduling a dentist appointment for her because I'm afraid of what we'll be told.
She's a picky eater and I don't fight it.
I can sometimes get her to eat protein when she's not in the mood by promising something sweet afterwards, and I do.
I believe in the whole "perils of praise" argument and have been completely unable to stop praising her.
She had a high lead level at age 1 and we didn't move out and bankrupt the family ripping every last bit of lead paint out of the house. (It's down anyway.)
I want to wean but am being lazy about it, and I know she can sense my ambivalance.
I don't change the genders when reading sexist picture books.
There are only two people besides her parents she's willing to stay with alone for any length of time, and I haven't pushed it.
Sometimes I'm not sure when her last bath was.
Most of her shoes are no longer soft-soled.
A few weeks ago, in the process of climbing over a railing in order to let her sit on one of the lions outside the Saratoga Music Hall I let the bag on my back swing around and knock her head into the railing, really hard.
I'm glad not to be a full-time stay-at-home parent.
Sometimes I can't think of anything I want to do with her.
Despite my best efforts, she associates Christmas and birthdays with presents.
I make sarcastic, inappropriate comments that she doesn't get when forced to read inane books to her.
I let her sleep wih no blankets on nights when I'm huddled under two comforters. Her bed is in possibly the coldest spot in the house.
We gave up on cloth diapers because we couldn't keep her from getting rashy in them. We barely can now.
I've opened and returned gifts sent to her without letting her see them.
I rarely put sunscreen on her.
When she's not looking, almost all of her artwork goes right in the recycling. Even the first birthday card she "wrote" on.
I didn't manage to keep up a baby book past a month or two. I have no idea what her first word was.
Sometimes I say yes so I don't have to say no.
I write and publish stuff about her that might embarass her later, and use her real name.

I'm not promising it's my top 25, just 25. I'm also not sure if it feels as meaningful as I thought it might. Try it, and share what you think? Cathartic? Annoying? Unnecessarily guilt-inducing? Causing of prideful fake modesty?

More by this author:

Smackdown: No Naughty Chair For Us, Thanks

Kate Tuttle — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:01:00 GMT

Popularized as an alternative to spanking, the time-out has become such a feature of American child-rearing that it's spawned an entire industry in advice books and tiny moralistic furniture. And no episode of Supernanny would be complete without it. Millions of parents seem to feel it's the only non-violent way to discipline their children, and that without it we'd be a nation of spankers, misbehaved kids, or both.

I disagree. It's not that I spank my kids – I don't, never have and never will – nor that I think they should be allowed to run roughshod over my household or anyone else's. Neither do I think my spawn are somehow just naturally well behaved and perfect. It's just that time-outs, at least as carried out on Supernanny and in homes and daycares with designated "naughty seats" or "time-out chairs," seem to me just as physically coercive and humiliating as spanking. Watching TV nanny Jo Frost instructing parents to march their children back to the "naughty chair" dozens of times, even engaging in wrestling matches with those old enough to put up a good fight, then extracting a forced apology from a child who often barely remembers or understands her crime, makes me wonder what on earth she thinks this teaches a child (beyond reinforcing their natural urge not to get caught in the first place). Is this really meant to help a child grow into a person with empathy and a moral compass?

All kids (heck, all people) get overwhelmed at times, and most of the bad behavior in my house – whether from my toddler or my teenager – comes from mental and emotional overload. Taking some time away from a stressful situation is often the best solution, and I have no problem suggesting that my child go someplace quiet to restore his or her calm. Since most toddlers are simply too young to do this on their own, I often take my son out of the room for a breather, but then instead of putting him on a chair or step to "think about what he's done," I sit with him until he's feeling peaceful enough to return to the fray. As the child psychologist and parenting author Penelope Leach says, "the toddler whose behavior has gone beyond the pale doesn't need pushing further out but bringing back in." In effect, until your child regains his self control you can lend him some of yours. Once a child gets a little older, she can learn her own methods of self-calming, to break the cycle of whatever craziness is underway. But demanding a child take that break in a time and place of your devising, under rules that separate him from you and your love, feels punitive and ultimately cold-hearted. If you have to get up and chase him down and then physically overpower him to get him to stay there, how exactly is that a kinder, gentler form of discipline? And despite the idea that time-out is the alternative to spanking, a quick breeze through parenting websites that discuss discipline makes it clear that most parents who do one also do the other -- as one mother on such a site said, "with my son I have had to spank him for doing the same things over & over, because the time out didn't teach him anything."

To my mind, kids need guidance and lots of modeling as they learn to navigate their emotions and frustrations. Formalized rituals of discipline don't seem to work as well as showing a child how to take a deep breath or ask for help. Many meltdowns can be averted by anticipating tough transitions, letting kids know what to expect, and helping them work through their problems, especially that perpetual difficulty (for adults as well as kids) of putting feelings into words. When the words don't come and intense emotions turn into unacceptable actions – throwing things, making a deliberate mess, becoming a danger to one's self or others – then it's a parent's job to offer a safe place to chill out, whether in the parent's arms or not, and a framework for recovering from any hurt feelings, and a chance to handle things differently next time.

So no naughty chair for us, please. Nobody in my house is naughty, any more than we're angelic. We're all just people –the parents as well as the kids – dealing with all the crazy mixed-up feelings people have, learning as we go. If that doesn't conform to Supernanny's standards, well, I'm okay with that. And if things get really out of hand, there's always Mommy 's Time Out, though probably best to save that for after the kids are in bed.

The Other Side:

Smackdown: I Need a Time Out!

Kids Taken after Mom Arrested for Airplane Spanking

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:32:00 GMT

So let's say you're on a flight and the woman seated in front of you spanks her two kids for spilling a drink and then curses at an attendant before throwing her drink on the ground in a fit of stupidity.

What should the mom's punishment be?

Publicly rebuked? Told to be quiet? Maybe cursed at behind her back?

If you said arrested on a charges of terrorism and jailed for three months while her children are placed in foster care and have an adoption pending, then you're the winner -- the only one in this sad, strange tale .

Welcome to America.

Let's hope it changes quickly.

The story begins with Tamera Jo Freeman and her Bloody Mary. Her two kids were being kids and accidentally spilled their mom's Bloody Mary into her lap -- apparently a big no no that merited three spanks each. (Maybe cut back a few instead, huh mom?) A flight attendant confronted Freeman, who then had a hissy, cursed and threw down her drink.

Not cool, but honestly -- terrorism?

She was arrested and only released from jail when she pleaded guilty to a charge of federal terrorism. Her kids were taken away and placed with foster parents -- who are trying to adopt them while their mother is free on parole but unable to leave her home state to visit them or attend hearings.

Is this really a fitting punishment for a mom who, OK, probably had one too many and did something stupid but not horrific? Of course not.

This is insanity.

The LA Times wrote the in-depth story on these crazy charges stemming from overzealous prosecutions under the Patriot Act and it's worth a look. For instance, one couple was arrested for essentially trying to join the Mile High Club.

(Mayday, Mayday! There's fornicating in the restroom!)

Another man who stripped naked on a flight, tried to open an emergency exit and had to be restrained, got off with no charges whatsoever. I'm not saying he deserved a terrorism charge -- he was drunk -- but it certainly seems more threatening than a mom getting all pissy and throwing her drink.

Even a lawyer involved in writing the Patriot Act said airlines are going too far -- hi flight attendant Amy Fleming, looking at you!

"A woman spanking her child is not as great a threat to aviation as members of Al Qaeda with box cutters. That much is clear," the lawyer told the Times.

So what do you think? Does the punishment fit the crime? Will you ever open your mouth on an airplane again?

Bus Driver Spanks 6 Year Old For Not Sitting Down

JeanneSager — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:59:00 GMT

A six-year-old won't sit down on the bus. What do you do? If you're one Oregon bus driver, you spank his little tushie and put him back in his seat.

Or maybe (just thinking out loud here), you could put his seatbelt on and tell him to sit there . . . then write him up for disobeying and put it in the hands of administrators and his parents? Apparently, I wouldn't make much of a bus driver.

Parents of the kids on the bus have told the Eagle Point School District they'd like him removed - citing not only the spanking incident but the fact that he's an erratic driver, frequently accelerating and slamming on the brakes. The district told an Oregon newspaper it's already taken appropriate disciplinary action. Therefore: case closed.

Wait, what? He gets to touch hand to tuchus and go about his merry way? This is not a spank or not to spank issue. Because that's something parents can argue about. This guy wasn't a parent. And as such, he doesn't get to use corporal punishment.

Bus drivers don't have it easy; I'll grant you that. They're at the front of the bus, with their backs turned to a large group of kids. On the drive home, that back is facing a group of youngsters who want nothing more than to get out the energy that's been pent up all day while they sat in a classroom with hands a scribblin' and legs a wigglin'. Kids learn naughty things on the bus because there is little a driver can do when he's paying attention to traffic and seated at the far end from where a bunch of kids are talking about s-e-x.

But I'll give you the same argument here that I gave to giving teachers extravagant gifts to make up for the crappy pay: they chose this job. The degree of difficulty does not give them a bye on treating our children according to the laws of the land. They're hired to protect our kids, transport them home. Taking someone's six-year-old over your knee to teach them a lesson? That's assault people.

Image: 2News.TV

When Your Kid's is the Puny Gift to the Teacher

Students Watch Autopsy of Teen From School

School Security Guard Teaches Biology Class

Mom Gets Hate Mail for Ending Kids Thanksgiving Party

Male Blogger: Laboring Mom Not a 'True Emergency'

Scientific Reasons Not to Hit Your Kids–Ever

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:29:00 GMT

The majority of parents raise their hands to their children from time to time. And the vast majority of people who physically punish their kids are loving, devoted parents. They don’t see anything wrong with spanking or slapping their kids, and this view is all but condoned by our society. This makes sense: a quick slap or a spanking is bound to stop misbehavior in the moment.

But, as the child psychiatrist Alan E. Kadzin argues, corporal punishment not only does not permanently change behavior; it actually increases aggressive and noncompliant behavior in the long run. And children who are hit by their parents are also more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression, to do poorly in school, and to have strained relationships with their parents. That’s a whole lot of good reasons not to ever raise your hands to your children, especially since corporal punishment is likely to become increasingly severe and frequent over time.

Unfortunately, these clear scientific findings are not enough to change parents’ behavior. 85 percent of adolescents have been corporally punished by their parents. This high number may be partly explained by studies finding that people who are confident in their parenting abilities are impervious to science that goes against their parenting style. So when society says that hitting children is okay, and a parent finds that hitting stops a child from talking back in that moment, the parent is unlikely to listen to a psychologist claiming that hitting doesn’t work.

Societal thinking must change before parents’ views on corporal punishment change. In 23 countries, it is illegal for parents to hit their children, and parents in these countries are, not surprisingly, more likely to view physical punishment unfavorably. In the United States, however, the prevailing wisdom is that parents have the right to discipline their children as they see fit, within certain obvious limits. But, as Kadzin argues, if it’s illegal for an adult to hit another adult, why should it be okay for adults to hit the smallest, most defenseless people?

Interestingly, and disturbingly, the United States is one of only two countries that has not ratified the U.N.’s Convention on the Rights of Children. The obvious argument against ratification is that it would infringe on parents’ rights, since it forbids violence against children, even in the home. But the less obvious argument is that it would prevent 17-year-olds from entering the armed forces.

I don't think science has a fighting chance of defeating that brand of national wisdom.

Image: bible.ca

Best of FameCrawler: Week of September 26th

Whit Honea — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 20:00:00 GMT

Lindsay Lohan Trumps Clay Aiken's 'Oh, Hey, I'm A Gay Dad' Reveal. Sort Of. Maybe.

Criss Angel Car Crash Video

Was Oprah Found Dead?

Travis Barker and DJ AM's Plane Crash Explained?

Suri Cruise is Isolated and Lonely

Travis Barker Plane Crash: Statement Issued

Pamela Anderson's New Playboy Spread (Photos)

Sharon Stone Loses Custody of Child

Britney's Womanizer Leaked

Is Criss Angel Dead?

Sarah Palin Disney Movie: Head of Skate

From The There Is A God Files: Patrick Dempsey Likes A Good Spanking

They Say: Spanking is the Gateway to Abuse

Madeline Holler — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:01:00 GMT

After unleashing a little whoop-ass on rampant corporal punishment in U.S. schools in an earlier post, I came across a report on a soon-to-be-released study about spanking within the home. Looks like moms who say they or their partners spank also tend to use other, harsher forms of physically abusive punishment on their children. Harsher forms include beating, burning, kicking, hitting with an object somewhere other than the buttocks, or shaking a child less than 2 years old.

Which is not to say every spanker goes this far. A good thing, too. Because while some surveys show a slight decline in the use of spanking as a form of discipline in the last 30 years, guess how many Americans report spanking their 3- to 5-year-old children at least once in a while:

90 percent! So now you know you're not the only one.

But lets look at these harsher punishments and the connection between them and spanking. Around 1,400 mothers in North and South Carolina were surveyed on the phone. Here's what they found (from UPI):

The study, published in the September American Journal of Preventive Medicine, said 45 percent of the mothers reported they or their partners had spanked their children in the previous 12 months, 25 percent reported spanking with an object on the buttocks and 4 percent reported using harsher forms of punishment.

"This study demonstrated that parents who report spanking children with an object and parents who frequently spank children are much more likely to report other harsh punishment acts consistent with physical abuse," Zolotor said in a statement.

Here's the upshot: nearly every parent has resorted to a thwack on the bottom at some point in their parenting history. Of those who didn't then want to collapse in a corner, rocking themselves through the waves of guilt and regret -- in other words, the ones who use the paddle/hand as a go-to discipline of choice, no prob -- they were more likely (though not guaranteed) to also have used a harsher forms of physical punishment (the burning, etc.).

So let's hear it: do you spank? Have you spanked? What do you think of this survey (just North and South Carolina? There's evidence that spanking is more accepted in the South ...). What about other people (teachers) spanking your kids?

Is it ever OK to hit your kids?

Should You Intervene When Strangers Hit Their Kids?

Photo: medicineworld.org

Is it ever OK to hit your kids?

Brett Singer — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:25:00 GMT

Hannah's terrific post about whether or not to step in when you see someone hitting their kids reminded me of a post I'd wanted to write for awhile now.

Over in the Babble forums, a thread titled Smacking my 2 year-old is up to 155 replies. As someone who was slapped once by my mother (I think it was more traumatic for her than it was for me) and was only spanked by someone else's mom (the less said about that, the better), hitting kids is something that isn't really on my mind. Now, I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand the urge, especially when it's your first child and the stress level is much higher (that was my experience, anyway). But I always resisted, not because I wasn't angry enough, but because I felt it was wrong.

Beyond my personal feelings about smackage, I had, perhaps naively, thought that corporal punishment had gone the way of the dodo. To be fair to the person who started the thread, it doesn't sound like s/he was beating the kid. It was more of a "snap out of it" type of slap – interrupting a massive crying jag. It also worked, and, as parents, we all know how tempting it is to try something again if it actually MAKES THEM STOP SCREAMING.

So what was the upshot of the discussion? Most of the users who replied felt that hitting children was wrong no matter what. Some took issue with the "holier-than-thou" attitude that they saw in certain comments, such as, "The only thing more insulting than being smacked in the face is being spat on. I'm shocked, quite frankly."

In the same vein, some wrote that since the person asking for advice was "not writing this so that I could be criticized, but for advice" that meant that no one should pass judgment. Unfortunately, this is even more naïve than me thinking that people don't hit their kids. As anyone who spends time "interacting" with any website knows very well, once you put yourself out there you open yourself up to criticism as well as whatever it is you've specifically asked for, especially when the topic is as nuclear as this one.

So – let's go nuclear, shall we?

Is it ever OK to hit your child? If not, is there hitting that is acceptable, or is it all bad?

image: middlezonemusings

Oy vey, Miley showed her tuchas again

5 things that would make parents' lives easier

5 ways to get revenge on your kids (NOT hitting them!)

What about his taste in women?

20 Disturbing Baby Products

S&M Barbie

Man locks daughters in cage while he works

Savage stands by his stupid words

When playgrounds attack, the sequel

Woman goes to jail for adopting children to get money

The Right and Wrong Way to Use Timeouts

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:17:00 GMT

Timeouts seem self-explanatory: your kid acts out; you make him go to his room or sit on a chair in the corner, by force if necessary; the worst the offense, the longer the timeout, right?

Wrong, wrong, wrong, says renowned child psychiatrist Alan E. Kazdin, writing for Slate. While timeouts can be effective, relying too heavily on the timeout as a method of punishment will do nothing to change your child’s problematic behavior. In fact, excessive timeouts worsen bad behavior—which means you give more and longer timeouts, which means your child acts out more, which means your home becomes a battlefield.

To avoid this, Kazdin recommends returning the timeout to its original meaning: a “timeout from reinforcement.” Rather than an angry punishment, the timeout was originally meant to be a simple withholding of attention, since kids tend to repeat behavior that garners attention of any kind. To hope that a timeout will cause a child to “think about what they’ve done” and repent is to be self-delusional.

Instead, use timeouts briefly, calmly, and immediately following the problematic behavior. Timeouts should never be physically enforced—dragging your child to his room, for instance, completely negates all of the timeout’s benefits, which are mostly accrued in the first minute or two of timeout. If your child refuses to cooperate with a timeout, raise the penalty by one minute or take away a privilege. On the other hand, always praise compliance with timeouts.

Kazdin points out (rather obviously, though it’s easy to forget in the heat of the moment when Susie hits her little sister for the third time in an hour) that the most important tool for changing problematic behavior is to actively work on replacing the hitting—or yelling or food throwing or painting on the walls—with positive behavior, through constant reminders and positive reinforcement.

And when that’s not working and all you want to do is lock the little miscreant in his room for 20 minutes, perhaps you need to give yourself a brief timeout from reinforcement.

Photo: hometown9.com

No Hitting On April 30 (for Canadians, Anyway)

Amy Kuras — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:31:00 GMT

How I love Canada. Living across the river from such a progressive nation, it brings into sharp contrast the ways in which our two nations differ and ours often comes out on the losing end (ONE YEAR partially-paid maternity leave, people).

Here's another check in the "Canada is awesome" column: the Canadian Red Cross is designating April 30 as No Hitting Day as a way to teach parents the harmful consequences of using physical discipline on their children and to promote alternatives to hitting.

More then 70 percent of assault injuries against children are the result of physical discipline that escalated, according to the Red Cross. Many parents don’t especially want to hit, but lack role models or training about disciplining in other ways.

One of the things I like about this is that it doesn’t deny the need to discipline children. Much anti-spanking rhetoric is eye-rollingly simplistic, written by people who it appear have never met a child, or at least never stared down a hugely willful three-year-old.

The Red Cross's advice mostly speaks to controlling your temper. Some of the suggestions are to put it mildly NOT HELPFUL when said willful three year old is running laps around the preschool classroom giggling at your frantic attempts to get her to put her damn coat on and leave, say, as a completely and utterly hypothetical example I just made up clean out of my head. Others, though, are – like making yourself go to the other side of the room or another area in the house if you feel yourself about to snap.

If there's a parent out there who hasn’t at least once felt the urge to spank – well, you’re ridiculously highly evolved and likely a huge bore at arties. For the rest of us, though, committing to learning better methods will help both our kids and ourselves.

How to Discipline Your Child -- Finally, Some Answers!

Madeline Holler — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 19:13:00 GMT

When your kids misbehave, are you a ranter or a reasoner?

Genetically, I'm a ranter who, until now, has fought hard to become the calm reasoner. I've tried (unsuccessfully) to recreate myself into the kind of mom who, in the heat of a child's blatant disregard for the sanctity of a peaceful home and/or the delicate nature of my own sensitive nerves, could quietly make "I" statements, talk about feeeeeelings and sensibly redirect the defiant child into more acceptable actions or self-expression. You know, so my kid could make better judgments, make better choices, change her own behavior without so much damn intervention (and talking and feeling and discussion -- or ranting).

But guess what? Not only are ranters barking up the wrong tree, reasoners aren't getting anywhere either. At least that's what one child behavior expert, Alan E. Kazdin, says. He's summarized his reasoning and strategies over on Slate. I'm going to give it a try. But here's the strategy in a nutshell:

1. Screaming and/or hitting your kids doesn't change behaviors. And it gets them to scream and/or hit when they face conflict with other kids.

2. Reasoning with you child about bad behavior doesn't change that behavior. Though it does give them practice in talking about their feelings with you, meaning they might come to you as they get older with stickier problems they need help on. So, reasoning isn't bad. It just won't change bad behavior.

3. Focusing on bad behavior doesn't change bad behavior.

4. Focusing on GOOD behavior changes BAD behavior.

5. Tell your child how you'd like them to behave in a given situation (fight with sister, upset when Mom says "no") and then practice it in a pretend situation. Praise and reward with love and hugs. Perhaps even reward with small trinkets.

He says it can take two weeks to a month to change a behavior, but that you won't (and shouldn't) be rewarding it forever.

Think you'll give it a try? I'm going to. Jeez, which behavior should I start with?

Photo: Yourparentingsolutions.com

5 Dumb Discipline Ideas that are Hopefully History

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:09:00 GMT

Disciplining children can be an honorable estate filled with intentions of instilling civility to stopping that midtown tantrum. Over the years, though, some silly practices have masqueraded as good ideas.. most of which make today's negotiations and time-outs seem like strokes of genius (the over-parenting crisis notwithstanding) by comparison.

Here are 5 of the worst discpline ideas from the past 100 years...

1. The Dunce Cap - The use of shaming to keep kids in line has a long and trusty history. The Dunce Cap, shaming the child in school who doesn't know the right answer or acts out inappropriately, has fortunately given way to more subtle means of shaming (monthly testing anyone?).

2. Ruler on Wrist - Also employed to keep those one-room schoolhouse rascals in line, the ruler across the hands or wrists is punishment indeed.

3. The Switch - Favored by the do-it-your-selfers this method is particularly effective if the child is first required to pick out his or her own switch.

4. Spanking - Obviously still practiced today, though less in California since they tried to pass that ban on spanking. But seriously, what gives? Are kids taught discipline by such an undisciplined act? Doubtful.

5. Children are to be Seen and Not Heard -- Less a method of discipline than a philosophy, the idea that children could ever be kept quiet seems absurd in the extreme. Further evidence that discipline is often more about the unrealistic expectations of parents than truly teaching children anything useful.

Even though time-outs and natural consquences seem to work less well for certain kids, methods employed by most parents today seem more humane and well-informed than those from the past.

Spanking Leads to Sex Problems

Madeline Holler — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:06:00 GMT

A new study claims that children who were spanked may be at a higher risk for sexual problems later in life. Initial findings of the study suggest in addition to being spanked, kids who were slapped or hit, had objects thrown at them are at a greater risk for being coercive with a sexual partner or engage in masochism (or get aroused by spanking).

Yikes! Generations of parents flogging themselves from shame after reading this report.

The good news is, there's not a one-to-one causation. Also, most kids who were spanked escape long-term harm. It's worth bearing in mind that these findings are yet unpublished (and, therefore, unreviewed) and the study was conducted by a guy who has made his name by denouncing spanking and other violence in the home (though the 81-year-old admits he spanked his own kids when they were young).

Another spanking researcher said while these findings are the first to link spanking and sexual problems, the connection may well come down to how the child processes the spanking (or hitting or object throwing).

From USAToday.com

"They may internalize that to mean that in loving relationships sometimes there's pain or physical aggression," she says. Another possible lesson is that "whoever is stronger and has more power can overpower the other person and use physical aggression to control the other person's behavior."

Still, makes you wonder how Strollerderby contributor and Babble essayist Cole is taking this news.

Pediatrician Poll: Spanking

editors — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:00:00 GMT

"Neutral. I think that time out is often equally effective, as are other behavioral modification techniques. There are some children for whom spanking, done appropriately, is effective and safe. I am a very well-adjusted, successful professional who was spanked by my mother, whom I still love dearly to this day." — John W. Waidner, MD, FAAP. Jacksonville, FL.

"I'm against spanking. It sends the wrong message that violence is an acceptable means of conflict resolution." — Eugenia Marcus, MD, FAAP. Newton, MA.

"I am anti for the most part. I think there are other forms of discipline that are effective." — Julie Luttinger, MD, FAAP. NY, NY.

To obtain these results, Babble randomly called 300 AAP-approved pediatricians in 50 states, then tallied the answers of the 20 who called back. Pediatrician Poll appears in Strollerderby every Friday.

Anti-Spanker Spanks His Own Kids

Karen Murphy — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 12:33:00 GMT

Boy do I love a good double standard! Where else but in the world of parenting can you get away with them, anyway? I mean, even though we don't intend to, we're all about "Do as I say but not as I do." It's one of the fun parts of being a parent, perfecting the art of judicious lying ("What? Inhale? Me? Er....[uncomfortably change subject here]").

So why am I not altogether surprised that an Australian minister who broke up a family over a spanking issue, has admitted to spanking his own kids?

Oh well, at least people know where Community Services Minister Kevin Greene really stands now on the spanking thing. He's...against it, right? Because with his own kids, well, that was in the past and he doesn't need to do it any longer; they've moved past the toddler stage, where spanking is apparently perfectly okay—if you're not a toddler. And if you're not in Mr. Greene's district, in which he's made it quite clear that no spanking is to be tolerated (unless you are Mr. Greene).

These things are confusing. Rules! Understandably, parents in the district are confused, especially foster parents who risk losing their kids, or in one case grandkids, as several were removed recently from their home because the grandmother smacked one six-year old for playing in a storm drain. Australia's been struggling with the smacking issue (which sounds more appealing than "spanking," don't you think?) for some time now, and this latest doesn't make anything easier.

Photo: www.news.com.au

Why Can't We Be More Like Sweden?

Karen Murphy — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:32:00 GMT

They say, somewhat irreverently but at the same time with more than a grain of truth, that your first child is your "practice kid." Firstborns get a lot of attention and they also get the learning curve. Once you're in the territory of two or three, some things seem relatvely easy and don't elicit that huge feeling of panic that occurs with baby #1. Hellllp!

Which is where Sweden comes in. It's already known as a parent-friendly and child-friendly country, giving support to new parents and providing child-friendly public spaces. But guess what else Sweden does that we could really really use elsewhere as well?

Parenting classes.

Though I used to think parenting classes were just for losers who lacked common sense, what Sweden is starting makes perfect sense. How many of us know the best thing to do in every situation with our kids? Sure, we read books, we talk to other parents, we read useful, humorous, and scintillating online content , but I could have used a class or two to help address my insatiable urge, for example, to manage every conflict between siblings, or just simply to make issues relating to divorce and single parenthood easier and better for everyone.

In other words, I think we all could use some support in parenting.

Of course, the classes could totally suck. That would be a problem. But 99% of Swedish parents taking these new parenting classes for older kids (they already have parenting classes for parents of newborns) would recommend them to someone else. So I'll take those, please.

Besides, Swedish parents, for the most part, rock. Hey, they don't spank! And they have great-looking baby gear (definitely a prime consideration for judging a parent is by the coolness of their baby gear).

Still, I'll take the classes. If only the commute wasn't such a bitch.

Photo: farm.tucows.com

Babble Talk: Pushed Too Far on the Playground

editors — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:00:00 GMT

Is it a new phenomenon or have parents always been this scary? Linda J. Williamson writes about her playground learning curve in Rules of the Game where she bemoans her lack of clarity on the right reaction to the mini-bullies of the yard, while wondering if she’s the only parent paying attention when things start turning all Lord of the Flies. The driving force behind Williamson’s confusion is the fear of what those other parents might do or say to her if she steps in to discipline the kid who is torturing her toddler. Being afraid of other parents and their judgment/aggression/antisocial behavior seems to start in Lamaze class and continue until your baby is a post-grad. While Williamson doesn’t give us the answers as to why we find ourselves intimidated into smiling and even forcing a, “Hee hee, aren’t they spirited?” as the wild kids run roughshod over the ones who are just there to get a little swing time, she does offer some hard-learned lessons we can all adhere to in times of playground ambiguity. Still, an intense afternoon on the playground can make a level-headed parent wonder why more parents aren’t going nuclear and bringing out the spanking option, like our own Cole Gamble in this week’s Bad Parent. - April Peveteaux

We're a Nation of Spankers?

Karen Murphy — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:34:00 GMT

Spanking. Even the word makes me cringe a bit. So yeah, I have my own childhood issues with this, which definitely come into play when I read a headline like "Spanking Can be an Effective Component of Discipline."

Hello? What century is this? I thought we were abandoning corporal punishment for children.

No, apparently not, especially if you're the dubiously impressive-sounding American College of Pediatricians. (established 2002. "The best for children".)

So let's dissect this a bit, shall we? By clicking on the links we end up in a PDF document that states, in part: "The fundamental goal of parenting is to teach and assist the child in acquiring character traits such as self-control, respectfulness, integrity, honesty, and competency. These traits do not come naturally to the infant, toddler or preschooler, but through the disciplinary process every child will acquire them to some degree. Discipline is defined as “training expected to produce a specific character or pattern of behavior, especially training that produces moral or mental improvement.”

So let me get this straight: the parent is a [not so] benevolent dictator whose job it is to shape the life of a naturally recalcitrant child? And this can ONLY be accomplished through discipline. Er, training. Training? Like obedience training for dogs, yes?

I can barely get through the "Guidelines for Parental Use of Disciplinary Spanking," which essentially state that spanking should be administered in private, after a warning, and should be "motivated by love," and go on to give thorough instructions about how much to "redden" the skin.

Remembering times when I'd be banished to my room to await the inevitable (but private!) spanking that followed, I cannot help but shudder at the fates of kids whose parents end up subscribing to this method of "discipline" just because some impressive-sounding organization recommends it. The impressive-sounding organization, by the way? Also sounds off on gay marriage, abortion law, and early-pregnancy genetic screening. Which pretty much tells you where they come from.

And the impressive-sounding paper entitled "Corporal Punishment: A Scientific Review of Its Use in Discipline" seems mostly a defense of spanking, refuting studies, for instance, that show that childhood spanking leads to poor adult outcomes (depression, addiction etc) and claiming that 94% of American parents spank their 3- and 4-year olds at least occasionally. Hello? We do? Oh, and physical child abuse is defined as “non-accidental injury inflicted by a parent or caregiver.” So that means that INTENTIONAL injury inflicted by a parent or caregiver is not abuse?

Whoa.

Okay, one more thing. I'm not talking about a little swat on the diaper-padded behind here, given on the fly to a chortling toddler with a mischievous grin. And while I don't advocate those either, I think kids understand them a whole lot more than they do the coldly-administered "discipline" (from ages 18 months to 6, rarely beyond 10 years old) urged by this hidden-agendaed group.

And the whole thing makes me sick to think that there are parents out there who don't trust their own judgment when it comes to their kids and who will be taken in by this crap and think that spanking is the way to go. I am sorry for them and especially I am sorry for their poor kids.

(Oh, ugh, here's a nauseating list and description of "spanking implements," which are not recommended because the hand is "more personal".)

Photo: BBCNews