It's interesting that very often the people who most stridently insist that humans are nothing more than animals are also the people who purposefully blind themselves to the lessons that nature teaches. Specifically, every type of mammal uses physical violence against their own kind to establish and maintain social and physical dominance. Not only is this behavior universal, but it's also essential to mammalian social structure. It's impossible for creatures to work together as a group without establishing a hierarchy, and physical force is the ultimate arbiter of authority.
Wolves are incapable of reasoning with each other, so the way they settle disputes is through (generally non-lethal) combat. The winner dominates the pack, and the loser submits or leaves. Similarly, adult humans cannot reason with children, because until the early to middle teenage years humans are incapable of concrete reasoning. It's pointless to try explain to a 5-year-old why he shouldn't throw the baseball in the house or how it hurts his sister's feelings when he refuses to share. He may appear to understand, but he doesn't. Words will make an impact for a few seconds, but the behavior will quickly return. One thing that will leave a lasting impression, however, is a good smack on the butt.
Physical punishment is important for children, but it should also be used sparingly and in love, not in anger. Spanking isn't a way for a parent to take out aggression or relieve frustration, it's a way to teach a child an important lesson that they may not be able to learn any other way. As with everything, balance is key. I've worked with children for a long time, and the worst ones are those who are never physically punished. They don't understand their place in the social order, they don't respect adults, and they don't obey because they never experience any negative consequences for disobedience. Our brains are wired to learn from pain for a reason.
Proverbs 13:24
He who spares the rod hates his son,
but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.
Hebrews 12:5-11
5 And you have forgotten that word of encouragement that addresses you as sons:
"My son, do not make light of the Lord's discipline,
and do not lose heart when he rebukes you,
6 because the Lord disciplines those he loves,
and he punishes everyone he accepts as a son."
7 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father? 8 If you are not disciplined (and everyone undergoes discipline), then you are illegitimate children and not true sons. 9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live! 10 Our fathers disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, that we may share in his holiness. 11 No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it.
I have a one-year-old son whom I love more than I can say. I fondly hope that he will never do anything bad enough to deserve a spanking, but I know that's just a pipe dream. Because I love him, I will use judicious physical punishment when necessary, even though it will just about kill me to do so, so that he grows up to respect others and learns the importance of obeying God. I finally understand the meaning of that "This is gonna hurt me more than it hurts you" line that parents have used from time immemorial...
On a side note, I want to say to Michael Williams that I really enjoy this blog, it's one of my very favourites -- interesting topics, thoughtful perspectives, and a sensible approach to Christian faith. Keep up the good work!
Ken: Thanks much!
Michael,
Neither I nor any of my siblings were spanked or otherwise physically punished. I believe that we all turned out pretty well.
In my family, there were only two reasons a child might receive corporal punishment:
(1) a child too young to understand receives a corporal punishment for any action that would have worse natural consequences. E.g. a toddler who runs into the street would be spanked so that he would associate running into the street with bodily harm. We also used slaps on the hand to teach children not to reach for dangerous things like electrical outlets.
(2) an older child would be spanked for deliberate disobedience. All other offenses used natural consequences or penalties for rule-breaking as punishment. No one got spanked much past the age of eight.
I think that kind of spanking policy is perfectly reasonable, and I fear the anti-spanking Nazis who believe all spanking is bad.
This topic raises a paradox between actual corporal punishment and the willingness to use it. If your children firmly believe that you will physically punish them if they're bad enough--severely if necessary--then you will rarely need to punish them. But if you tell them that you will never go beyond a certain point in punishing them, then you've effectively invited them to push the limits. The parent who disciplines without apology to whatever extent is necessary rarely needs to raise his voice and usually has well-behaved children, while the parent who advertises his self-doubt must constantly use the low-level punishments he permits himself--making both parents and children unhappy.
This paradox appears in many foreign policy contexts as well, e.g. Saddam never believed that the US would use the ultimate punishment--invasion--for his violations of UN sactions. Our obvious self-doubt gave us years of low-level conflict with him. Now that we've shown that we are willing to do whatever it takes against our enemies, we won't need to project force nearly as often. For example, Libya decided to shape up without us needing to fire a shot.
In parenting or foreign policy, the principle is: Unwillingness to use strength is the same as weakness, and weakness promotes uncertainty and conflict.
using the same words from a previous comment by wacky hermit, i in fact believe that you unbelievable people are the nazis. michael williams, you yourself say taht children cannot reason at the age when they should be corporally punished, but if that is the case, how are they to associate pain and torture with the action that you would be justifying it by, and not the person administering that pain and torture. children don't respect a parent that abuses them, they fear that parent. and all i know is that i fear the nazis
JS: No, your analogy is flawed! The children are Nazis, and if we don't stop them early, when they're deploying in the Rhineland, then we'll have much tougher battles ahead.
Nazi analogies are stupid.
Thank you for your common sense in a sea of psychobabble. All the so-called "experts" - Barbara Coloroso, Dr. Phil, etc. - righteously denounce spanking. They never mention, on the other hand, why in a time like today when fewer parents spank, our world is hardly a utopia; in fact, it's gotten worse for children in many ways (suicide rates, abuse, etc).
Now of course children should not be spanked just for the sake of being spanked. Some naturally well-behaved kids may never need physical punishment at all. But to those who say that it's "abuse" to spank a child who runs out into a busy street, I say: grow up.
I can't believe some of the comments that are written on this page. Children are higher beings placed on the earth so that we can learn from them not punish them. There is nothing that a child could do that deserves that right to physically abuse them. This punishment only teaches them to fear and hate. Everybody who would every think about hitting a child should be ashamed. Do you feel so badly about yourselves that you must take it out on a innocent child.
betsy: Uh, do you know any children? "Higher beings", right. Hopefully some day you'll grow up yourself and realize that disciplining a child is for his own good, and that neglecting discipline is the true cruelty.
higher beings??? ok back to reality. when i was in school we were paddled and if my parents found out i got another. spankings were used by my parents when all other means of getting my attention failed. you know i don't recall any school shootings during this period. there was certainly more respect for adults than today. and as stated above I TURNED OUT OK. also if time outs really worked then prison would put an end to crime. i bet if we sentenced them to 3 years of daily beatings then prison would be alot more scarey.
I got spanked and I didn't turn out okay >_
I highly agree with you Michael. I am a senior in high school and i am doing a research paper on the topic of child discipline. You make an awesome argument. I was spanked when i was younger, and i still get grounded, etc occassionally. I have faired far better than many people i know and it was because i was spanked when i was younger. Parents are parents, not best friends. I believe spanking is ethical and effective. I also believe parents who use time-outs, etc. are wrong, and those who do not discipline are neglectful parents. Theyre kids will not learn anything. I am a 17-year-old and i know this. I think some parents need to learn that discipline is the key way to raise your kids. Spanking is not abuse--there is a distinct difference. Michael i believe you are right and make excellent points.