Originally posted by Rank outsiderSir your patience is admirable, time and again you have rescued this thread from the
No thanks. I answered your question. Now for a change answer one of mine.
nefarious Machiavellian intrigues of thinkofone, while refraining from returning his
insults in kind, many a lesser man would have given up.
Harsh Physical Punishment and Appropriate Spanking Are Very Different
Den A. Trumbull, MD, Pediatrician Robert E. Larzelere, PhD, Peter Nieman, MD
Pediatric Healthcare
The article entitled "Physical Punishment and Mental Disorders" by Dr. Tracie Afifi (1) in the July Pediatrics takes a misleading "bait and switch" approach in opposing all use of disciplinary spanking with children. The authors discover an association (not causation) between an adult's retrospective recall of receiving "harsh physical punishment" and the presence of an adult mental disorder. The survey asked whether they were "pushed, grabbed, shoved, slapped, or hit by their parents" during their childhood. Remarkably, the survey neither included the term "spanking" nor limited the survey to the conventional definition of spanking: "striking a child with an open hand on the buttocks or extremities with the intention of modifying behavior without causing physical injury." (2)
Furthermore, participants in the study were most likely recalling experiences as teens, since retrospective reports correlate highest with events occurring at ages 12 to 14 years, more so than for earlier ages. (3) Adolescence is certainly not a recommended age for the use of spanking, let alone the use of harsh physical punishment.
Remarkably, the researchers gloss over their finding that "individuals with a family history of dysfunction were more likely to experience harsh physical punishment." That may be a better explanation for the mental illness association than the one they postulate. The use of harsh discipline is often a marker for troubled families and such an unhealthy environment takes its toll on a child. It is also suspicious that they control separately for gender (aOR-1 in their Tables 2 and 3) or this family history (aOR-2), but never together. It is possible that controlling for both reduces the odds ratios for most mental illnesses to a non-significant level.
After baiting the reader with an extensive and exclusive discussion of the use of "harsh physical punishment," the authors make the switch and conclude that all "physical punishment (i.e., spanking, smacking, slapping) should not be used with children of any age." So, they study the use of inappropriate harsh physical punishment with an inappropriate age group (teenagers) within dysfunctional families and then draw a conclusion that ordinary spanking of a young unruly child should be proscribed. In interviews following the release of this study, the authors failed to make the distinction between the harsh punishment studied and ordinary spanking of children leading the media to announce that "Children who are spanked, hit, or pushed as a means of discipline may be at an increased risk of mental problems in adulthood." (4)
This study by Dr. Afifi and her colleagues cannot draw any conclusion about whether the most appropriate kind of spanking (e.g., two open-handed swats to the buttocks) should remain an available option for parents when children of an appropriate age (about 2 to 7 years) defiantly refuse to cooperate with milder disciplinary measures, such as time out. That limited use of spanking, when directly compared to alternative disciplinary tactics, has actually been shown to lead to improved compliance and less aggression in children. (5) Sadly, this study says nothing about the effects of appropriate disciplinary spanking, adds to the growing confusion surrounding the topic of child discipline, and furthers an unscientific bias against corrective disciplinary measures employed by parents.
References:
1. Physical Punishment and Mental Disorders: Results From a Nationally Representative US Sample. Afifi T.O., Mota N.P., Dasiewicz P., MacMillan H.L., Sareen J. Pediatrics. 2012; 130:1-9.
2. American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health. Guidance for effective discipline. Pediatrics.1998; 101:723-728.
3. Stattin, H., Janson, H., Klackenberg-Larsson, I., & Magnusson, D. Corporal punishment in everyday life: An intergenerational perspective. In J. McCord (Ed.). Coercion and punishment in long-term perspectives. 1995; 315-347. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
4. USA Today News, July 2, 2012. http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-06-28/spanking-mental- problems/55964610/1?csp=34news (accessed July 7, 2012).
5. Larzelere, R. E., & Kuhn, B. R. Comparing child outcomes of physical punishment and alternative disciplinary tactics: A meta-analysis. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review. 2005; 8:1-37.
Den A. Trumbull, MD, FCP Pediatric Healthcare Montgomery, Alabama
Robert E. Larzelere, PhD, Professor Dept. of Human Development & Family Science Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma
Peter Nieman, MD, FRCP (C), FAAP Clinical Assistant Professor University of Calgary Medical School Calgary, Alberta
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
... less
Submit response
Published July 23, 2012
This was published in Pediatrics the journal of the AAP.
Question to TOO. How do we ascertain whether Robert Larzelere is correct or incorrect in his assessment?
http://humansciences.okstate.edu/facultystaff/Larzelere/nztabconts.47.pdf
Here is an article which sets out the case that different frequencies and severity of spanking has different effectiveness and impacts. It finds no justification for a complete spanking ban.
TOO : this is called evidence. Please read and explain why you believe that conditional spanking as defined is unacceptable.
It is interesting to note that the term conditional spanking contains many of the conditions that were present in the defintion I used of 'child swatting'. As you will see, the study directly challenges your view that other methods of discipline are as effective. As child swatting as defined is even milder than that defined here as conditional spanking, there is even less reason to believe that child swatting is harmful.
As Robert Larzelere is one of the leaders in the study of this topic, and has done detailed studies over decades, can you explain what it is that you know that he doesn't. If you bother to read the article, you will see that he is not alone in his assessment that many studies which have claimed to support a complete smacking ban are seriously flawed and do not, in fact, support any such conclusion. And some who support his view do not personally support the use of spanking. I wonder what their agenda is?
And please also bear in mind that Murray Straus, as far as I am aware, has never been able to produce any evidence, nor has ever claimed, that this type of discipline is harmful.
Maybe you can find something in Lazelere's personal life to try and rubbish him with. But make sure you find something for all the others that support his view.
So, in summary:
1. No advocate of a complete anti-smacking policy has been able to produce evidence that mild child swatting is harmful despite decades of research. TOO has accepted that he does not have any.
2. There is evidence that it is not harmful and that it can be more effective than other methods in some circumstances.
3. The circumstances, and general level of severity and frequency, of the child swatting we were discussing before TOO waded in were the type of discipline which the available evidence suggests are effective and not harmful. In fact we were discussing something arguably much milder and less frequent, but let's leave that to one side.
4. These views are held by a number of pediatric specialists who have studied the matter over decades. According to TOO, these people must be 'ignorant'. Even though one of the studies which formed the basis of one of the supporters of Larzelere's view was described by Murray Straus as possibly 'the best single study available'.
However, TOO, with his wealth of pediatric and child psychology expertise, seems justified in labelling anyone who does occasionally swat their child as sickening and barbaric.
Give me strength.
Originally posted by wolfgang59I knew what a swat was as soon as it was introduced.
Your definition was a laudable attempt to get us all talking about the same thing.
I didnt phrase it very well but I was asking for an independent
definition. "Swat" is being thrown around as if it is a common-
place term and I cannot get any definitions for it off the net.
So it looks like it has been made up for this debate and this
debate only.
To me it meant a light smack. Also with the word "smack" you might confuse it with the hollywood meaning of actually punching someone in the face.
In the light of nearly 30 pages of posts , I think "swat" is the best term to discuss what we are talking about here.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneHe's the most disingenuous now, is he? That's quite a list you've got there.
[b]Though TOO won't believe me, I really would change my mind if someone could provide me with even a shred of evidence that it is.
You've got to be one of the most disingenuous posters I've come across and that's saying a lot given what's been said on this forum.
Once again:I've already pasted this before, so please actually go to the ...[text shortened]... ynamics/communication-discipline/Pages/What-About-Punishment.aspx>[/quote][/b]
See what the punters think about this :
My 6 yr old boy was just acting like a little s*** for ages. He just wouldn't shap out of it. I tried watching a movie with him.
i tried other activities. He just kept throwing tantrums. Demanding chocolate and drinks in a terrible voice.
i bought him the chocolates and the drink.
i let him choose which movie to watch (which we only got 10min into)
He just wouldn't stop and then after about at least 2 hours of this ridiculous, disrespectful behaviour from from someone who knows better I had suddenly has enough. " No, get your own drink,mate"
He kept screaming. First I stood over him and looked down, as if I meant business. Still he just kept acting silly, nearly falling off the chair at one point.
After having got up and hugged him many times in the two hours previous this time I warned him that I would smack his bum if he didn't knock it off.He looked at me to see if I was serious. Then I raised his leg and gave him a light swat. It really was very mild. I just had not swatted him in so long that even the idea of it was suddenly embarresing to him. That Dad should have to resort to smacking him was unthinkable for him.
He really did need a reminder. There were other people there and he was acting like everything and everybody was there for his amusement/destruction.
After that swat, which was more symbolic than anything else, he quitened down thought about it. Ten minutes later we had a chat about why
i had to swat him. He understood. He behaviour did a complete 180* about turn and we had a really nice night of playing cards
So it seems that just the embaressment from receiving a swat snapped him out of his ruttish behaviour. I did have to go through with the smack, but like I say, it was purely symbolic , to show that I meant what I say.
I wouldn't even say it was firm as a regular 'high five' from me
Originally posted by Rank outsiderMy grandmother was a very smart woman, it seems.
So, in summary:
1. No advocate of a complete anti-smacking policy has been able to produce evidence that mild child swatting is harmful despite decades of research. TOO has accepted that he does not have any.
2. There is evidence that it is not harmful and that it can be more effective than other methods in some circumstances.
3. The circumst ...[text shortened]... one who does occasionally swat their child as sickening and barbaric.
Give me strength.
Well done, Sir!
Originally posted by bbarrI could tell, otherwise you wouldn't have used that example. The fact that you present a few facts to some people and they try to paint an entirely different picture out of it is the most sickening thing on this thread.
My grandmother was a very smart woman, it seems.
Well done, Sir!
Originally posted by Rank outsiderNice try again. Give it up already.
I am comfortable with my reasons for posting it. Whether you like it or not, everything I have said is true.
Now answer the question, why do you reject out of hand what they have to say?
Is it that they are a religious association, for example?
Originally posted by Rank outsiderActually there were only two questions in my post and, unless I missed something, you answered neither:
No thanks. I answered your question. Now for a change answer one of mine.
"What about "mild infrequent" sexual stimulation of infants?"
"Do you similarly draw the following conclusion? "
So where did you answer my questions?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThe way you satisfactorily prove them wrong is not to point out their religious conservatism or homophobic tendencies, but to provide evidence and arguments as to why they are wrong.
Nice try again. Give it up already.
You have none so your resort to the only method you have left.
What are your views on Robert Larzelere's evidence?
Originally posted by Rank outsiderFrom what I can tell, you've posted what amounts to a "Letter to the Editor" in a response to an article published earlier in the journal. Have to say, it seems a bit underhanded to say, "This was published in Pediatrics the journal of the AAP " without qualifying it.
[quote]
Harsh Physical Punishment and Appropriate Spanking Are Very Different
Den A. Trumbull, MD, Pediatrician Robert E. Larzelere, PhD, Peter Nieman, MD
Pediatric Healthcare
The article entitled "Physical Punishment and Mental Disorders" by Dr. Tracie Afifi (1) in the July Pediatrics takes a misleading "bait and switch" approach in opposing all u ...[text shortened]... certain whether Robert Larzelere is correct or incorrect in his assessment?
But then earlier you turned to the "The American College of Pediatricians" which, by reports, seems to have a similar lack of integrity.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneDo you believe that Robert Larzelere believes it is acceptable to mildly sexually stimulate young children?
Actually there were only two questions in my post and, unless I missed something, you answered neither:
"What about "mild infrequent" sexual stimulation of infants?
Do you similarly draw the following conclusion?
So where did you answer my questions?
You are getting desperate if that is the best argument you can come up with.
Do you have anything better?