Their Religion Permits Corporal Punishment Of Children example essay topic

This world of equal opportunity and equal rights sometimes gives most of us the cold shoulder. We are the majority amongst you, and yet our needs are quietly hushed and put away. We are not a single race, culture or religious preference. Our stories are told worldwide, more today than ever before. This society promises to protect and shelter us from harm. But our hurt and pain is a pat of our daily lives that we cannot escape.

Who are we? We are your abused and neglected children, who are slapped, hit by objects, pinches, and shaken. Like all human beings, and perhaps more importantly, children need to receive love and nurturance. Fulfilling their physical needs alone will not ensure or maintain quality in their live. We as adults, often forget that children are individuals with feelings and thoughts of their own.

(Block) There was an old woman who lived in a shoe She had so many children she didn't know what to do She gave them broth, Without any bread Whipped them all soundly, and sent them to bed (Mother Goose) All across American households, adults whip, spank, paddle, and swat children as a form of acceptable punishment and as deterrent to unwanted behaviors. These actions are considered corporal punishment, and can be defined in numerous ways. Corporal punishment as defined by the American Public Health Association is "the infliction of bodily pain as a penalty for behavior disapproved by punisher" (American Public Health Association). Similarly, the American Medical Association describes it as "the use of force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain, but not injury, for the purpose of correction or control of the child's behavior" (American Medical Association). No matter how it is defined, spanking is a practice that is so widely accepted in American culture that it is even celebrated in this popular Mother Goose children's rhyme.

May argue that this type of punishment has been effective ever since the "good old days" when kids learned forcefully how to behave and act. The traditionalists use it as an effective strategy to discipline children. They believe spanking a child lets them know who is in charge and feel that corporal punishment is the only way to teach kids. They believe if they chose a progressive style of child management they might get controlled by their children, instead of the other way around. Can we really raise our kids in "quiet time"?

What are the reasons behind the traditionalists using corporal punishment? They say that the Bible tells parents that if they spare the rod they will spoil the child, "using physical force is often necessary to protect children from danger". It has been argued that a light smack will stop a child from running out onto the road, touching a hot element or playing with an electrical socket. Other reasons they say are that children have to be taught right from wrong. The purpose of smacking children is to cause them pain in the belief that this will stop them behaving in an unacceptable way and deter them from future misbehavior. They also believe "children are naturally naughty and they have to be taught firmly how to behave acceptably", therefore; parents should be free to bring up their children as they think best.

Traditionalists believe changing the law will not change people's behavior and that the law should not turn caring parents into criminals. Currently the law discriminates against children on the grounds of their age, giving them less protection from physical assaults than adults enjoy. Moreover, they also think children who are not smacked will turn into badly behaved brats and smacking children is more preferable than other forms of punishment. And lastly they argue that abolishing smacking may transgress cultural beliefs. Being spanked is an emotional event.

Most of these parents think back to the times when they were spanked and say "I was spanked when I was a kid and I turned out ok", and end up lashing out at their own children. On the contrary, progressives believe that corporal punishment is an exploitation of the power to inflict pain, fear and humiliation. Many studies have proven cumulative negative affects corporal punishment has on children. These negative consequences included harm to cognitive ability and development, antisocial and violent behavior, potential for future abusive behavior during adulthood, bodily harm and injury, sexual development problems, emotional distress, and can even be a gateway to more abusive means of discipline.

Many of the traditional parents view spanking as an easy way out and as a temporary physical discomfort towards their children. According to Elizabeth Gershoff, a researcher at Columbia University's National Center for Children, spanking a child will stop the child from misbehaving fro the moment, but the child's compliance will only last for a short time; corporal punishment actually increases the child's non-compliant behavior in the future. The more children are hit, the more likely they are to hit others including peers and siblings and, as adults, they are more likely to hit their spouses. (Vedanta m). Therefore, Gershoff's study, which is based on an analysis of 88 studies over 62 years, indicated that the effects of spanking are mostly harmful, sending unintended messages to children. Murray Straus, founded and co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire found out that people are worried that if", parents never spanked, the result would be kids running wild, higher rates of delinquency, and when they grow up there would be more crime".

But the research shows just the opposite and the chance that a child will become rebellious or depressed increases. Hitting children teaches them that it is acceptable to hit others who are smaller and weaker. According to Straus, corporal punishment increases antisocial behavior, provokes anger and a desire for revenge, which could be expressed much later. The parents may destroy the child's sensitivity and compassion for others and for oneself, and make them accept illogical arguments such, "I am hitting you for your own good", or "I hurt you because I love you". Long-term effects that a child may retain from spanking would make them think that they do not deserve respect; their suffering must not be felt, it must be ignored; that only good can be learned through punishment; that violence is an expression of love. It may cause a child psychological damage, confusing the child by sending them immoral messages that indicate love with pain and anger with submission (Barnes).

A poor substitute for more positive forms of discipline, spanking, far from spoiling children, ensures that they learn to think about others and about the consequences of their actions. If today's parents can break the cycle, society as a whole will benefit in future. Many traditional parents argue that it is their right to bring up their children according to their own set of rules and guidelines, which may include spanking, since there is no legal prohibition in the United States against parents spanking. They might think of their children as their possession and spank them for their own safety and educational purposes. This might cause negative consequences later on for the family when the children grow up and think that they can't approach their parents to solve an issue they might be having and probably can't allow themselves to trust their parents. It might also create communication barriers for the children to open up to their parents.

Some parents believe that spanking a child is perfectly "ok" since they were hit as a child and it did not do them any harm, or that is a part of their culture and that their religion permits corporal punishment of children. Considering all of this, parents who are liberal might know that corporal punishment avoids discussion of an issue, and hinders any chance for communication through intimidation. Talking a conflict through is not an option anymore. Spanking becomes a reflexive response to a child's disobedience. Contrary to popular belief, banning corporal punishment is about setting standards and changing attitude, not about prosecuting parents and diving families. It might be a pain in the neck for parents to have a child who expects a reason and explanation for everything, but in the long run, as Straus's study proves, young children who are not spanked tend to have a better mental development, do better in school and have a higher chance of graduating from college.

These children also tend to be less violent, and suffer less from depression and alcohol abuse as adults. Despite accepting the spanking on the surface, today's parents might feel resentment and deep hurt by it inside. Children all over the world share the same basic needs for safety, health, nurturance, and dignity. Parents who act, as guardian figures should not be the one inflicting pain instead they should help promote children's physical and mental health. But families who are open minded should know that these goals are limited by corporal punishment and have no place in any child's life. Spanking can cause children to lose their ability to reason and understand when they are faced with pain, fear and anger.

This might make it difficult for parents to explain to a child exactly what they are being punished for (Straus). According to progressives there are several alternatives parents can use instead of physically punishing their child. B.F. skinner, an accomplished behavioral psychologist believes that parents can use redirection to offer a child an acceptable choice for an unacceptable one. This decreases the likelihood of temper tantrums. Positive reinforcement can be used to increase your child's positive behavior when a child acts inappropriately by rewarding them with verbal praises. This is a way of acknowledging their good behavior, and it promotes continuance in that behavior.

Giving logical consequences to an action can teach a child responsibility and finally being a good example for your child is the best way to decrease inappropriate behaviors in your child (M antz). Parents should be aware of the powerful influence their actions have on a child's behavior, consequently they should verbally interact with their child by encouraging and praising them which eventually enhances their cognitive abilities. A nonverbal response such as a smile or a nod provides incentives for accomplishment and builds confidence in the child. Using good manners when talking to children about their behavior such as "I am sorry,"May I?" and "Excuse me" when they are appropriate can influence the child in a positive way. Being a good model for your children in your actions can empower them to learn how to manage their own behavior. Thus, corporal punishment does not only affect children physically, but socially, emotionally, and mentally (Ramirez).

Why do I think these alternatives are the best approach to American family life? A study done in 1986 by Murray Straus and M allie Paschall, who began one of the most credible longitudinal studies showing that talking to children is associated with an increase in neural connections in the brain and in cognitive performance. She stated that, "those findings led us to theorize that if parents avoid corporal punishment they are more likely to engage in verbal methods of behavior control such as explaining to the child, and that the increased verbal interaction with the child will in turn enhance the child's cognitive ability" (Straus and Paschall). This study tested 960 children's mothers in the National Longitudinal Study of Youth. Of these mothers, 44% reported spanking their children at least once during the week prior to the interview. The defining characteristics of this study were factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, presence of father, number of children, the mother's supportiveness and cognitive stimulation, and birth weight were all controlled.

The study did in fact support their hypothesis that one of the reasons for higher cognitive ability of children who are spanked the least is because, in the absence of corporal punishment, parents use more verbal methods of control such as explaining to the child. The less corporal punishment the mothers used, the higher the scores on measures of cognitive stimulation were for the child. The conclusion is obvious; corporal punishment causes detrimental effects on the cognitive abilities in children. Instead of teaching values such as right from wrong, self-control, cooperation in resolving conflicts, using words, high self-esteem, respect of others and clear expectations.