Originally posted by jaywill
The idea is that if you hit him on the behind you might just save him from worse consequence in the future.
A cop won't hit him on the butt. The cop will probably aim for the [b]skull.
Maybe he didn't read Dr. Spock, you see.[/b]
The idea is that if you hit him on the behind you might just save him from worse consequence in the future.
That idea is both wrong and un-Biblical!
One of many sources:
http://drkathleenyoung.wordpress.com/2010/04/15/violence-begets-violence/
quote:
Results: Frequent use of CP (ie, mother’s use of spanking more than twice in the previous month) when the child was 3 years of age was associated with increased risk for higher levels of child aggression when the child was 5 years of age (adjusted odds ratio: 1.49 [95% confidence interval: 1.2–1.8]; P < .0001), even with controlling for the child’s level of aggression at age 3 and the aforementioned potential confounding factors and key demographic features.
Conclusions: Despite American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations to the contrary, most parents in the United States approve of and have used CP as a form of child discipline. The current findings suggest that even minor forms of CP, such as spanking, increase risk for increased child aggressive behavior. Importantly, these findings cannot be attributed to possible confounding effects of a host of other maternal parenting risk factors.
And for a christian perspective
http://www.biblegems.com/SPANKINFO.HTM
quote:
Jesus told His followers to be as wise as serpents, but as gentle as lambs. In First Timothy chapter 3 we are given the qualifications for a Christian man who might be selected as a pastor of a church. One of the qualifications is listed in verse 3 as "no striker". This means that he should not be someone who strikes other humans. There are no exceptions given. He should not strike his neighbors, he should not strike his co-workers, he should not strike his wife, and he should not strike his children. In the Bible verse that follows the one that says that a pastor should not be a striker, the Bible says that the pastor should have "his children in subjection with all gravity." If striking the children was meant to be used as one of the means to keep the children in subjection with all gravity, then this would have been an excellent occasion to give spanking as an exception to the commandment to be "no striker", but no exception is given. A pastor should not be one who strikes others, and that includes his children. If a pastor should not be a striker of humans, then it should certainly be the goal of all other Christians also.
...
Those who think that corporal punishment and spanking are important elements in the upbringing of a child run the risk of harming a child’s self-esteem and view of self. They also run the risk of being on the wrong side of a serious warning given by Christ when He said in Matthew 18:6, “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” To offend in the Greek language means to cause to stumble. Every child has such a great potential. Only the proper training can bring that potential to fruition. The wrong kind of correction can be a stumbling-block to the healthy development of the child.
Corporal punishment is not the answer. Strictness and harshness are not the answer. As in most things in life, the answer can be found in the example that Jesus gave us. Surely anyone who reads the gospels does not get a picture of Jesus striking a child for any reason. Jesus gave us an example of kindness and gentleness towards children. Jesus said in Mark 10:14, "Permit the children to come unto me and forbid them not, for of such is the Kingdom of heaven."
unquote
Edit: please read these. The links, that is.
What is the 99
10 Jan '12 21:22
Back to Top