Spanking/Hitting Intervention

[D-Roc]

Yes because obviously I must have did something wrong while raising him or he has some kind of psycological problem.


March 1999

Truer words have never been posted.

[Impala]

The AAP says spanking is the " least effective " of all methods - so you seem to be saying , in your view, the AAP is wrong and that spanking is " more effective " - as you say, depending on " the reason " ?

If so, re " Wrong reasons " ? What is the " right reason(s) " to spank in your view.

Give me 5 if you can ....or is there only 1, 2 or 3 reasons ?



That makes no sense . Which parents are the montoring then ?



Too funny.

Look at the statement as a whole and don’t pick out single words like “reason” to argue

Many parent use spanking in aa incorrect way.


The right reason to spank is when you have thoroughly explained something to a child and they still refuse to listen, even if it is because I am poor communicator or my child is stupid. At this point communication has failed the child has bunkered down and refuses to listen to rational reason.

What I am saying is that in the AAP’s study there was probably more than a handful of parent who did a poor job when spanking their kids.

And I don’t see how saying something is funny disproves it. The first thing that your quote listed was that “parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment” If that is the case the tests do not represent parents like me who don’t use unacceptable forms of corporal punishment. I would expect that if parent did use unacceptable forms of corporal punishment that the subsequent problems listed have a higher possibility of occurring.

[gemstone]

Can you please paste in the link that conains the quote you provided earlier ( below )....I assumed it was the AAP...just want to confirm.

" 1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in nd of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

I read the 1988 date in one of Impala's posts. When I searched it came up 1999 which makes it even more valid. Experts themselves disagree.

Obviously, those views aren't the views of the AAP....the APP has a " antispanking position " ...and relies on more than just one or 2 studies from which to form it's policy.

But, if you think the AAP is wrong after reafirrming it's " antispanking position " in 2004 - even after 6 years of fielding any and all challenges to the validity of it's cited research supporting it's initial ( and same ) position in 1988 - you're entitled to your opinion.

[B]


>>The new discipline policy, "Guidance for Effective Discipline,"1 of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is seriously flawed. Despite an excellent discussion of parental nurturance and positive reinforcement strategies, the policy statement is ill-founded and unrealistic in its account of corrective strategies, especially in its critique of disciplinary spanking.

To develop an unbiased, scientific analysis of the current research on corporal punishment, the AAP co-sponsored a consensus conference 3 years ago in which I participated. A 13-point consensus statement was drafted by the conference panel of experts. Concerning the use of corporal punishment by parents, the panel could not find sufficient data to proscribe the use of spanking with children between the ages of 24 months and preadolescence. A literature review presented at the conference actually found stronger evidence for beneficial than detrimental effects of spanking with 2- to 6-year-old children.2 The co-chairs of the conference concluded, "Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in and of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

The new AAP discipline policy statement largely ignores the consensus conference statement and, instead, selectively plucks from the conference proceedings several allegations of the avowed spanking opponents, without acknowledging the presentations of other participants. Eleven of the 13 citations in the policy statement to support its unconditional antispanking position in the "supplemental information" section concern presentations of antispanking participants at the consensus conference, not original research.<<


They have a conference and then don't even listen to the panels conclusions.

>>It is troubling that our Academy would espouse an "all or none" blanket condemnation of spanking founded on selective and biased citations of the research. Making this the primary theme of the policy statement cripples the effectiveness of the policy as a whole. Such Academy positions purportedly based on science will in the long run harm the credibility of the Academy. We need to do a better job building on the review of the consensus panel published in Pediatrics in October 1996, rather than ignoring it.<<

Got that right. If they won't listen to their own experts, why should we listen to them?

[gemstone]

Truer words have never been posted.

Oh that's right, if my kid turns out not so perfect, at least I will admit it and take responsibilities for my actions unlike you who will blame everyone else and toss him away.

That makes no sense . Which parents are the montoring then ?

That is what I asked. Maybe they are only interviewing prisoners. If it is from a small sample of parents then maybe they chose the wrong families because 90% of parents can't be wrong as far as I am concerned. I relate it to the Nielson families. There have been a lot of TV shows I really liked cancelled over the years because of them. Ask every household to participate and then post the results. It may change the “experts” opinions again.

[Ryan]

OK, this thread is overheated. Lock.