Discipline and Violence
2007 December 12
Reason number umpteenbazillion and one for why spanking should be illegal – Child Killed for Failing to Say “Please”
This outrages me on so many levels. To even begin to assume that getting a child to do what you want justifies doing violence to them is just so utterly sad.
julieclawson(at)gmail(dot)com 
May I ask if you are a parent?
Might I gently suggest that it may be just a bit of a stretch to assert that spanking inevitably leads to infanticide?
Was I the one suggesting that?
Just the fact that there are idiots out there who spank 2 year olds for not saying ‘yes sir’ is scary enough. That a person feels that they can beat someone weaker than them to manipulate that person into doing their will is disturbing. If that man had treated his wife that way he would be jailed for abuse, but of course it’s legal for him to do it to his children. People only get freaked when it does lead to stuff like this. Otherwise they defend the parent’s “right” to do violence to children.
And Landon yes I am a parent. And I do not and never will physically hit my child for any reason including getting her to do what I want.
Umm… no, it’s not legal to do this to children. What he was doing was clearly not “normal” corporal punishment within the bounds of the law or common prudence… clearly those who do spank would condemn his behavior, yet you clearly link his actions with the common practice of spanking without any sort of allowance in your mind for its proper use.
It’s fine for you to have your views on spanking, but I don’t think it helps to suggest (as I clearly understood from your post) that spanking is wrong because this guy killed a child. It’s a non sequiter but your post cites the story as a reason why spanking should be illegal in your view.
If I wanted to argue for a ban on handguns, it wouldn’t be convincing to say axiomatically that handgun owners kill people — the cause and the proof are not axiomatically linked. I don’t think this story makes your case any more than a drunk driving death makes a case for a total ban on alcohol or motor vehicles. Excess is already illegal in all three of these examples.
It seems to me that people reading your comments who do spank or have spanked would feel as though they are, in your view, murderous monsters raising deranged children.
Did you by chance read the article? It is about spanking and corporal punishment. The connection wasn’t just in my mind but came from the basic facts of the story.
Julie,
Yes. I just reread the piece, and no, it’s not about spanking — it’s about criminal child abuse. The article uses the word “spanking” only once to describe the actions of an unreasonable man… actions which escalated as he lost control and ultimately led to the toddler’s death. I think you’re reading into it… it’s very tragic, but it’s not about corporal punishment, it’s about the crazed actions of the stepfather and the criminal negligence of the mother. As I said, if you don’t agree with spanking that’s fine, but spanking as most parents would do and beating as these ones did are *not* at all the same thing.
While I agree that ’spanking’ and abusive beating are not necessarily the same thing, it seems to me that there is an inherent risk that when the practice of ’spanking’ becomes normal or routine, there is the potential for it to escalate – either to ensure compliance with instruction or due to loss of temper. As a parent I have always endeavoured to exercise appropriate discipline without corporate punishment.
For me there are too many tales of children being beaten by their parents.
Parental discipline and correction is possible without any use of corporate punishment.
Brother – I guess I just completely disagree. When I read that he told the mother to spank the child with a belt to get her to say certain phrases on cue, I see no different than others who smack their kids with a hand or wooden spoon for the same thing. Yes, it escalated and became tragic – but the initial impulse is the same – to physically hurt a child to get them to obey you out of fear of physical punishment.
Bro M – “Normal corporal punishment”, as you put it, is still the use of coercive violence against children. As Julie has pointed out, the difference here is one of degree, not of kind.
And IMHO, “spanking” is just a euphemism. Let’s call it what it is – beating your children. I don’t care if you use your hand or a spoon or a paddle or a belt, the rationale and the essential action is the same, and it’s wrong.
I guess we’ll leave it there then… I don’t think you fully understand the perspective of those who attempt to use corporal punishment in an appropriate way, and I’m not sure you’re willing to consider that they may have an appropriate method. I wouldn’t be so quick to assume there’s a wooden spoon about, or that it’s done in anger or in an attempt to make kids do what you want, and that there is no measure of when it is or isn’t used (e.g., the first response is always a “smack”?). To fail to separate discipline from beatings based on an assumed “initial impulse” seems pretty darn black-and-white to me. You can’t use this guy’s actions as an indicator of the “normative” use of corporal punishment by those who do use it! My impression is that if I or anyone else confessed the use of spanking in any circumstance, you’d stick us in the same camp as this murderous sod. Is abuse by some a certain proof that no appropriate use is possible? I guess I’ll dump my wine down the drain and park my car. Sorry, I’ll drop it now. Last word to you….
“As Julie has pointed out, the difference here is one of degree, not of kind.”
One could say the same about temperate enjoyment of alcohol and raging drunkenness. But I gather you are neither teetotalers nor out of control drunks. There is a major logical fallacy in that fundamentalistic argument. Sometimes degree, not kind, is precisely what matters.
I have seen plenty of non-spankers (I worked for a while as menial help at a resort for the rich years ago) patiently coo and reason with their kids until they hit the boiling point and then scream, bulging-eyed at them in a horrifying manner bound to lead to all kinds of emotional and psychological trauma – far worse trauma, I would argue, than that experienced by kids whose parents practice punishment of the type Brother Maynard is describing, in the manner Brother Maynard (not others who disagree with him) would describe it. But I don’t use their bad examples to argue that all non-spankers will act like them, nor that non-spanking inevitably leads to verbal and emotional abuse – even though in my observation of not only those rich families but also some of my non-spanking friends, it too-often does. Practiced well, non-spanking can be a good way to parent.
Mike & Julie,
Just a question – you’re a pastoral couple, and you state that corporal punishment of any kind is absolutely and categorically wrong, and that it’s child abuse with no avenue for discourse in the matter. As you’re not open to dialogue on it, would you as a pastoral couple exercise church discipline on a Christian family in your church that practices moderate corporal punishment?
No because we are not the sum of the church. A huge value in our church is agreeing to disagree. We are not hierarchical and think that church discipline as typically conceived is far from biblical.
That leads to lively discussions at church (we don’t do typical sermons, but discussions). We’ve had homosexuals attend our church as well as those who think homosexuality is the worst of all sins. And there are church members in the church who do spank their kids. We don’t equivocate on what we believe, but that has nothing to do with the corporate body of the church. That does not mean that I don’t stand up for what I believe in or that I won’t advocate for laws to protect children. And yes this is the number one issue that I get made fun of for by friends, family, and church members. Apparently questioning a parent’s “right” or “need” to hit their children (or even making a personal decision not to hit mine) is unacceptable behavior worthy of ridicule. I live with it and just don’t compromise.
Karl & Bro M – neither of us were making the argument that just because you spank your children that means you are or will become just as abusive as the guy in this article. That was your own inference.
Besides, it’s not necessary for us to make that argument. Spanking, even at it’s very mildest, is still wrong IMHO. You’re right Bro M, I don’t think there ever could be an “appropriate” method, because I don’t think the “method” is the issue. Whether it’s a gentle smack or beating with a belt, the issue for me is the use of violence, period. As far as I can tell, what spanking of any kind or any degree teaches children is that it is acceptable to use violence to solve one’s problems, and that essentially “might makes right” – i.e. that the reason to obey is because someone bigger and stronger than you will hurt you if you don’t. Even if those are not the messages you are wanting to send to your children, that is what they will be taking from it. And those are not things I ever want to teach my children, no matter what the circumstances.
So yes, Karl, I am one of those parents who think that reasoning with my child (even at the age of 2) is preferable to using violence. And like Julie said, we get plenty of grief and ridicule about it from pretty much everyone. I’m sorry if you and Bro M feel judged by those of us who don’t spank, but frankly, you guys are in the majority already, so I’m sure you’ll have no trouble finding plenty of people who will support your decision to spank. You should have no problem ignoring a few bloggers who don’t.
Though if our views make you guys feel uncomfortable, then maybe that’s a good thing. After all, the first step to fixing a problem is realizing that you have one in the first place.
Mike & Julie,
Thanks for the discussion. I don’t have a problem disagreeing on this, but the force of your views on it are so unequivocal and the language (esp. preceding your last two comments) comes over as pretty judgmental in my view: it seems to leave no room for me to disagree without being thought by you to be hopelessly wrongheaded and persisting in damaging children. e.g., it sounds distinctly like a moral or ethical issue for you, not a matter of opinion over which one can agree or not. If you feel as strongly as you sound, there isn’t really room to agree to disagree — either we’re child abusers or we’re not. Perhaps that’s not what you meant, but that’s how much of your language comes across to others. Were Karl and I in your community with you, I rather strongly suspect three things: (1) your comments wouldn’t seem as judgmental in light of the greater context of life together; (2) I wouldn’t seem at all as though I don’t love my kids and even have ways of showing this to them in the midst of discipline; and (3) my kids — of whom I am quite proud — are very well-adjusted and bear no horrible scars on their bodies or psyche over the way they’ve been disciplined, nor have they received any of the messages you say are inevitable — quite the opposite, in fact.
It seems to me that I have been able to see and communicate distinctions in this where you don’t want to entertain the possibility that such exist. That is what it is… but one thing that is recurring in the comments has to do with motivations for discipline. This has absolutely *nothing* to do with a parent’s “right” or “need” in *any* way… no matter what form of discipline is used, physical or not. This keeps creeping in as though physical discipline is always connected more to the desires of the parents than to the need of the child for discipline. This connection is a false one and has nothing to do with the form of discipline — get that one wrong and there is NO appropriate form because the parent isn’t an authority figure or a disciplinarian anymore… they’re a bully. And again, this has *nothing* to do with whether or not the discipline is physical; I think Karl touched on this quite well.
All that to say that our point of disagreement may even be more fundamental than the mode… though you may well agree with much of the preceding paragraph. Pointing out bad examples as normative proofs just doesn’t help — discipline for the wrong reason and/or in an unmeasured way and you leave scars. I think that was my main beef at the start of the discussion… the CNN article is in no way an apologetic against spanking, because it’s too far outside the practice of those who do spank and there’s nothing to say that the tragedy that occurred there is inevitably and inseparably linked to the practice of spanking. They didn’t practice discipline through spanking, they attempted to practice control through abuse. Even if you disagree with spanking, you can’t connect the two without distinction.
In the meantime, those of us who love our kids and seek to engage in the holy task of raising them well do the same thing: the best we know how to do.
Anyway, maybe we’ll take a break and then have some sort of argument about church discipline ;^) (Not that any of us have said enough on the subject to even spark a discussion, let alone an argument!)
Yep, you’ve pretty much summed up how I feel about it.
As a kid i was spanked, i don’t think my parents were committing child abuse etc i think they were just trying to bring us up as best as they knew, spanking for them was a loving action of involvement rather than an abusive one. It certainly taught me some things like not playing barber, it’s not a good idea to be knocking through walls in the house and matches and flamable objects should not be mixed…
Both Mike and I grew up in spanking homes. So we’ve been there done that and don’t hate our parents for it. But we still think it’s wrong. And yes it is very much a moral/ethical issue for us. And guess what, we hang out with a lot of people with whom we have serious ethical disagreements with. Relationships and loving others trumps ethics in our book. Sure we’re postmodern relativists in that way, but we still know what we believe. Almost all of our friends and family condemn us and make fun of us for not hitting our child – they also make fun of us for thinking it is ethical to be a good steward of the earth. But we still love them.
I agree that most parents spank out of love rather than a desire to abuse. But that doesn’t make it right. One’s intentions are not the issue.
Do you really think a law making spanking illegal would have stopped this obviously psychotic man from beating that poor girl to death? I respect your right to argue that all spanking is wrong. I’m not sure I agree but you have that right, but this argument seems flawed to me. Murder is currently illegal and that didn’t stop this whacko from killing that girl, why would a spanking law have stopped him?
Sadly, I don’t think it would have mattered if spanking was illigal or not. Beating your child to death is illigal and yet these parents broke the law and beat their child to death.
And, there are millions of parents who spank their children and have never beat them, there is a HUGE difference between beating your child and spanking them.
Besides the degree of force used, what is the difference?
I would guess the motivation is usually the same: to teach your child to obey.
And I would guess the rationalization is often the same as well – I suspect most parents who beat their children would say they are doing it out of love.
And the messages – might makes right, violence is an acceptable way to deal with problems – are the same too.
So what is the difference?
Question for those of you here who do spank: why? Did you make a deliberate decision to spank when you became a parent, or was it just a default – your parents spanked you, so you spank your kids? Or if it was a deliberate decision, what were your reasons? What does spanking accomplish that could not be accomplished by some better means? Have you ever considered not spanking, and if so, why did you decide to continue? What makes it so worth doing that you aren’t interested in finding a less violent means of discipline?
I’m honestly curious. Since my personal default in any situation (not just parenting) is non-violence, I’ll need some pretty convincing reasons to believe that spanking is a method that I ought to start practicing.
Mike,
I’m not trying to convince you to start spanking in any way. I’m simply saying saying that I’m not sure a law would have stopped this guy. He wasn’t doing it because he loved the kid (and for anyone to make that argument is intellectually dishonest) he was hitting this little girl because he was mad. I agree that’s abuse whether it leads to death or not. However, I’m not sure this leads to a good argument to make spanking illegal.
Joe, I wasn’t making that argument. My wife did. My question above is separate from that issue (and was not a response to your comment anyway). So I’ll ask again: why do you spank? Why do you choose to do it and have you ever considered other alternatives?
In any debate the burden of proof is on the affirmative side. Prove to me, then, why spanking is better than the alternatives.
I would have to say, that in our family, spanking is not a method that works, and so we have, not only considered, but ARE using a different method. I don’t think that you or anyone else should be convinced that spanking is right for you, I just think that the argument that spanking is the same as beating your child is completely false, or that outlawing spanking would have provented the death of this preciuos baby. And I don’t think that anyone could prove to you that spanking is better than the alternatives.
I’m with Lori. Any given form of discipline will work better with some kids than with others, and a good parent will evaluate these forms with respect to each child, and re-evaluate as the children grow and enter different phases which require different forms of discipline.
Mike, I appreciate the question, but it’s still steeped in value judgments: “What does spanking accomplish that could not be accomplished by some better means?” and “What makes it so worth doing that you aren’t interested in finding a less violent means of discipline?” By your admission, this is a moral issue for you and those who practice spanking are therefore by definition keeping a lower moral standard than you are. Nobody is trying to convince you to spank… why would we tell you to do something against your conscience?
I think your views on spanking and of those who spank have been made pretty clear, and I’m not actually convinced there’s much point to pressing this further. Per Julie’s comment, it’s unfortunate that you’ve been the subject of ridicule over this… that isn’t right and fortunately I don’t think anybody’s been doing that in this thread. I do have to wonder though if so much of the misunderstanding might have less to do with your choice in forms of discipline and more to do with the attitude toward those who don’t share your convictions. Just a thought.
Okay, I’ll bite, but only with that caveat that I’m not interested in convincing you to spank your kids. If you find that you are able to raise a responsible, compassionate child without the use of physical discipline, more power to you. This is not, as you put it, a debate. I’m not defending anything by explaining my perspective. I’ll be open to an alternative point of view to the same degree that you are. I agree with Bro. Maynard that the language you and Julie have used up to this point communicates that you think that you are better parents than those of us who spank, and that’s not a way to foster real dialogue. With that preamble, here’s why my wife and I consider physical correction a reasonable means of discipline.
First, my wife and I simply don’t share your conviction that violence is never redemptive (I’m assuming that summarizes your position; clarify for me if I’m reading you wrong). I just don’t think you can get an absolute commitment to non-violence through the Gospel. In our case, we have a settled conviction that violence (which is not just physical) can sometimes be the only appropriate and even loving response to a situation. You asked, “What makes [spanking] so worth doing that you aren’t interested in finding a less violent means of discipline?” But all acts of discipline are coercive; the difference is in form, not effect. (And I do resent the characterization that those of us who do spank are “not interested” in an alternative approach. You don’t know me well enough to judge me like that.)
Second, there is a difference between punishment and discipline, and all parents have to find a way to avoid the former and pursue the latter. Discipline is structuring a child’s experience of the world in order to nurture responsible, loving behavior. Punishment is a form of revenge, pure consequence. We never, for example, discipline our children while we’re angry if we can help it. That isn’t just about spanking them, but any form of correction. We try very hard to be prayerful about how we correct the kids, we try to explain to them why we are disciplining them, and when we cross the line we have tried to be quick about asking their forgiveness (no amount of discipline can substitute for the lack of a living model of humility and self-correction). We’re not angels, but we attempt to discipline ourselves in these ways.
Third, you make it sound as though we either spank or use non-physical methods. “Why do you choose to do it and have you ever considered other alternatives?” you ask. We use every tool we can think of to nurture our children to become loving, responsible persons. It’s the goal that matters to us, not simply avoiding one means or another. Of course we prefer to reason with our children, to work through alternatives with them, to help them develop forms of self-discipline that will keep them from continuing to exhibit unacceptable behavior. Both of our kids are bright, caring and joyful – and in our experience reason just doesn’t work all the time.
I agree with Bro. Maynard wholeheartedly when he writes, “This has absolutely *nothing* to do with a parent’s “right” or “need” in *any* way… no matter what form of discipline is used, physical or not. This keeps creeping in as though physical discipline is always connected more to the desires of the parents than to the need of the child for discipline. This connection is a false one and has nothing to do with the form of discipline — get that one wrong and there is NO appropriate form because the parent isn’t an authority figure or a disciplinarian anymore… they’re a bully.” If you are punishing rather than disciplining, then every technique will harm a child.
Discipline has to be appropriate both to the situation and to the child. Spanking our youngest just didn’t work; she would turn right around and do exactly what she had been told not to do, with a smug grin on her face. Timeouts, on the other hand, absolutely destroy her. On the other hand, deprivations like timeouts and restriction work only intermittently with our eldest. She is at an age where we can discuss and reason with her more effectively, and that usually solves situations. When it doesn’t, and other approaches don’t work, a spanking has been the thing that has gotten her attention. I think we have spanked her maybe three or four times in the five years that we’ve had her. Neither of our girls are scarred emotionally, neither have gotten the message that “might makes right,” as you allege. If anything, my eldest has started to understand that “might should defend right.” That requires, of course, that my wife and I act in a just manner, which gets us back to the need to be a model of prayerful humility.
This is turning into a Russian novel, so I’m just going to end it here. The bottom line for me is that discipline is one aspect of the love that a parent has for a child. More important than any particular means of discipline is the context in which the child experiences that discipline. My kids don’t like to be disciplined, no matter what the form, but they know that Mom and Dad love them without condition, and that’s what makes the discipline redemptive rather than punitive. That’s also why the behavior that started this whole discussion, the abuse and murder of this child, has nothing whatsoever to do with what my wife and I do. If you can’t see the difference, then I don’t know what else to say.
Well put, Michael.
Yes Micheal, very well put!
Meanwhile in the red corner, there are those who use the bible as a justification for inflicting violence on their own children. Report here: http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/hitting-kids-by-the-book-based-on-proverbs-and-pain/2007/12/15/1197568332261.html
I haven’t read the book (nor would I want to help fund the insanity reported) but I am aware that there are parents who lean on the biblical invocation (not) to spare the rod.
As for myself, my father is a violent bully who taught me to fear him, and conceal from every emotion that he could ‘use against me.’
Now he’s approaching his eighties, and wonders why his grandchildren (my kids) are distant while his friends have great relations with theirs.
Violence usually perpetuates itself, but the best thing my father ever did was create a non-violent person in me….
It always sickens me when people invoke animal conditioning as a metaphor for child rearing….
Just my two-penneth worth
Stumpy
Thanks for your reply Michael. You make an excellent case for disciplining your children, though I never said we shouldn’t discipline, so I’m not sure why you felt the need to defend that point so thoroughly. I didn’t really think that was the issue here. (And I agree with you that discipline is different than punishment and that punishing is not something we should do.)
But I’m still unclear on why you think spanking, as a form of discipline, should be practiced. From what I can gather your argument is basically that it sometimes “works”. Is that right?
And yes, you’re right, I don’t think there is such a thing as “redemptive violence”. (Redemptive discipline, of course; but redemptive violence, no.) I’m with Walter Wink on this one. I think the whole idea of redemptive violence is a myth. At best it can only ever the be the lesser of evils, and only used as a last resort. And I can’t imagine too many situations as a parent where I would have no other resort than violence. It seems like there would always be some other way.
And just to clarify my question: I’m not expecting you to convince me to spank. I just want to know what reasons have convinced you to spank? Again, the only reason I could discern from your post was that “reason just doesn’t work all the time” and that “when… other approaches don’t work, a spanking has been the thing that has gotten her attention.” Is that the sum of it?
For the record, I haven’t spanked any of my kids in a long long long time. I’m not even sure I’ve spanked my youngest two ever, and my oldest in a long time. She’s five. To be honest, my wife and I are torn on this issue. I abhor violence. I was abused as a kid so I’m not in a rush to do anything to hurt my kids. We’ve found the “go stand in the bad choice” corner to be really effective.
Sorry to ignore this for the last few days, I just haven’t had much time online and am attempting to play catch-up…
“Again, the only reason I could discern from your post was that “reason just doesn’t work all the time” and that “when… other approaches don’t work, a spanking has been the thing that has gotten her attention.” Is that the sum of it?”
Whether or not it is the sum of it, you could at least address it without being petty. Your counterargument seems to boil down to the fact that you can’t imagine a situation in which spanking would be the only option. That, and “Walter Wink says ‘no’”, which is hardly pursuasive.
If it is observed that spanking is effective (as it has been in Michael’s case) then the onus is on you to prove that it cannot be effective, especially if you want to ban the practice.
I wasn’t trying to be petty kevin. I think you read too much into my phrasing. I was simply trying to sum up the argument.
And since “effectiveness” is not really one of my criterion regarding the morality of spanking, it doesn’t really matter whether I can prove that spanking isn’t effective. I happen to think that it usually isn’t, but that is totally irrelevant. Even if it were completely effective, I would still think that it is wrong.
I understand that, and that is where you and Michael are at an impasse. You oppose any act that inflicts any physical pain from a pacifistic lens. In other words, to embrace your argument, Michael must be a pacifist.
Given that pacifism is not the standard reading of the scripture, the onus is on you to prove that we must be pacifistic in our analysis of the issue. Of course, your argument would inherently apply also to the use of force by law enforcement (certainly including the use of handcuffs, which invariably inflict pain).
If you believe I am taking pacifist argumentation to unnecessary extremes, you are also charged with explaining why your opposition to spanking on pacifistic grounds is different.
If you argue that police may not use force, then you must argue just as fervently against any police action during an arrest.
Kevin – Who defines “standard” reading of scripture? In the history of Christianity there have actually been times when taking that whole “turn the other cheek” thing literally actually happened. In fact some could argue that non-violence is the historically standard reading of scripture. So don’t be so quick to pass the buck on thinking through the issue.
And it may surprise you, but I do inflict pain upon my child. We make her get shots. She has to go to bed at night. Sit in a carseat… What I don’t do it hit her in order to make her fear me and obey me out of fear.
Why would it be okay to do that to a child, but it isn’t to do it to an adult. If a man hits his child to discipline her and make her fear him it is defended as his right. Substitute the word “wife” for child there and it is abuse that he could be jailed for. I find that sad.
I never said I was a pacifist kevin. What I said is that I don’t believe in the myth of redemptive violence.
I’ve been following this conversation for awhile, and I thought I would make a couple of observation. First, I’m surprised that there has been an absence of interacting with biblical teaching on the subject. The only biblical references I’ve really seen so far are about “turning the other cheek.” I am assuming that arguments against “redemptive violence” are based on biblical teaching, albeit interpreted by Walter Wink, as well? But then what do we make of these:
Proverbs 13:24: Those who spare the rod hate their children, but those who love them are careful to discipline them.
Proverbs 19:18: Discipline your children, for in that there is hope; do not be a willing party to their death.
Proverbs 22:15: Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far away.
Proverbs 23:13: Do not withhold discipline from children; if you punish them with the rod, they will not die.
Proverbs 23:14: Punish them with the rod and save them from death.
Certainly one could make an argument that “discipline” is vague word that justifies a morally accepted form, but it preposterous that spanking is excluded from that form. “Punishing them with the rod,” the “rod of discipline,” and “sparing of the rod” all imply a corporal form of discipline that is mandated to drive away “folly” and even save from death! It would seem that the principle that they are trying to teach is that the pain inflicted by corporal discipline disabuses one of more extensive pain down the road.
If this kind of discipline is nothing short of child abuse and a violation of the simplest ethics that protect human life it would seem that God has inspired a word that is completely false and manifestly hateful. That is, of course, it is, in fact, inspired. If it is not why should we see the pacifistic teachings of Jesus as authoritative? Could they not be the work of a biased scribe, not unlike those that penned the passages in Proverbs?
I can respect someone who makes the decision to refrain from corporal punishment, but it seems to be a bit judgmental to condemn those who do as engaging in a practice that is akin to spousal abuse (as if there were no qualified distinctions of maturity and authority innate to the parent/child relationship, quite unlike the marriage relationship [yes, I am an evangelical feminist]). It is true that many studies have shown negative effects on people from spanking, but I’m not sure how convincing they are. Certainly one could do a survey of families where it has a positive effect. Many of the commenters (including myself) have not reaped any ill effects from a loving form of corporal punishment. Evidence in this case only serves ideology, and it seems to me that the biblical record (which I find trustworthy) is far from condemning the practice and does not contain any trajectory hermeneutic that overrides it.