| |
| Childhood
And Spankings And Memories: |
|
Should
Parents Spank Their Children?
Controversy
continues over the age old debate about whether or not children
should be spanked by their parents. Although the pendulum in 'pop
psychology' is swinging back to being in favor of spanking, some
parenting experts think spanking children is still a bad idea.
At
birth we intuitively know our bodies are sacred. This provides a
built-in protection system. When a baby is startled by an uncomfortable
noise or touch, this protective system kicks in. When a child squirms
or throws both arms across the chest, the child is using this protective
mechanism. Observers of child development refer to this self-protective
mechanism as the ‘startle response.’ Within a few minutes of birth
this startle response is apparent.
Adults
need to respect children’s sacred physical boundaries and inherent
likes and dislikes beginning at birth. Lack of respect for a child
can disturb a child’s protection responses, rendering their intuitive
perception of unwanted or uncomfortable touch to be either inoperative
or very weak.
Parents
can avoid thwarting this protection system by minimizing any touch
or maneuvering that the child dislikes. When your child protests,
you need to stop immediately and find an alternative approach. Yes,
fostering and maintaining this protective system takes effort. However,
remember the goal is to reinforce your child’s right to protest
uncomfortable or unwanted touch for any reason, rather than simply
getting done what needs to be done—such as: bathing, dressing, undressing.
The
worst type of sacred body boundary violation is the use of spanking
as a form of discipline. Spanking, defined as slapping of the buttocks,
is a form of hitting and is physical violence. This fact alone is
reason enough to make the spanking of children unacceptable by the
same standards that protect adults, who are not as vulnerable. However,
there is more to spanking than simple hitting. Spanking also trespasses
on one of the body’s most private and sexual areas—the genitals.
Furthermore, violent socialization of infants, children and youth
by means of ‘spanking,’ ‘bopping,’ ‘switching,’ ‘licking,’ ‘whipping,’
‘paddling,’ ‘popping,’ ‘whacking,’ ‘thumping,’ etc. conditions children
to accept and tolerate aggression and violence. This leaves the
child prey to sexual abuse and incest. To address the inappropriateness
of spanking children completely, we need to consider not only the
issue of physical violence, but also the issue of sexual trespass.
It
is a known fact that sex offenders target children who appear to
have been victims before (quiet, withdrawn, compliant.) A previous
victim of body boundary violations tend to be quiet, easy to manipulate
and more likely to comply with a sex offender’s demands.
The
harm of spanking to reinforce appropriate behavior has been thoroughly
explained and demonstrated over the past century in a vast body
of academic literature, scientific research, legal treatises, and
recently in the popular media. We know that spanking is still considered
the preferential form of child discipline as 22 states allow paddling
with a wooden paddle in schools. Further evidence that spanking
is a preferential form of child discipline is revealed in a random
telephone survey done by Harvard Medical Center in 1997. 67% of
parents surveyed stated they hit their child(ren) an average of
once a week for discipline.
In
my discussions with people who use spanking to promote compliance
with instructions, the most frequent rationalization is that a two-year-old
child cannot be reasoned with—so spanking is the best alternative.
When I then ask the adult if I can hit them because they cannot
be reasoned with regarding hitting or spanking children, they are
chagrined by the obvious analogy.
Another
classic rationalization is the need to spank in emergency situations—when
there is no time for explanations. An example of the rationalization
that is frequently given is: “What if my child walks into the street
with oncoming traffic. In this situation, one has to impress on
the child that walking into the street is dangerous,” they reason,
“and spanking the child is the most effective alternative.” This
reasoning is faulty because spanking creates shock, whereby the
mind is unable to focus or retain logic rather than enhancing comprehension.
Furthermore, hitting engenders rage rather than respect. Thus, instead
of creating learning and compliance to avoid stepping into the street,
the child has learned to distrust and fear adults. Since the child
is dependent on their aggressor(s)for their survival and in order
to maintain the relationship, the child pushes the rage deep into
the psyche. The accompanying response to body boundary violations
is to act out in other ways that may include rebellion, violence,
self-destructive behavior, etc.
Some
people believe spanking is justified or even commanded in the Bible,
specifically the book of Proverbs. There is a distinction, however,
which is of key interest to fundamentalists, between the practice
in King Solomon’s day of beating people on the back and the modern
American habit of buttocks hitting. The latter is not prescribed
anywhere in the Bible. Furthermore, it needs to be pointed out that
the Old Testament contains passages that could be (and in some incidents
have been) construed as divine endorsements of wife-beating, racial
warfare, slavery, the stoning to death of rebellious children and
other behaviors that are outrageous by today’s standards.
Our
laws and our cultural values are unambiguous concerning adults who
physically attack or verbally threaten other adults. Such behavior
is recognized as criminal, and we hold the offenders accountable.
Why then, when so much is at stake for society, do we accept the
excuses of those who hit children? Why do we become interested in
the needs of children only after they have been terribly victimized,
or have become delinquents victimizing others?
The
answer is not complicated. We cannot believe that hitting children
is abuse until we can honestly acknowledge the mistreatment from
our own childhood experiences and examine the shortcomings of our
own parents. To the extent we feel compelled to defend our parents
and guard their secrets, we will do the same for others. We will
promote physical punishment as a 'standard' form of discipline or
look the other way. By continually insisting that we ‘turned out
okay,’ we are reassuring ourselves and diverting our attention from
deeply hidden unpleasant memories.
This
is why, when someone says, ‘spanking is abuse,’ many people react
as though a door barricaded since infancy has been smashed open.
This barricaded, unconscious door has prevented us from committing
the most dangerous most unpardonable act of disloyalty imaginable,
disloyalty to our parents. We are afraid that by opening the door
to the truth we might fall through into an abyss—abandoned and cut
off from any possibility of reconciliation with the parents we love.
The fear is irrational. Denial—about what was done to us and, now,
what we are doing and allowing to be done to the next generation—is
the real danger and the real sin. Hitting is a sacred body boundary
violation and is violence toward another human being. In the case
of hitting children for discipline, it is an act of violence by
the person, who the child trusts implicitly and on whom the child
is the most vulnerable and dependent.
Reconciliation
and healing can only begin with an acknowledgment of the truth.
It is futile to hope that denial, lies, evasions and excuses can
somehow erase the memory and pain of past injuries.
Dorothy
M. Neddermeyer, PhD, author, If I'd Only Known...Sexual Abuse in
or out of the Family: A Guide to Prevention, specializes in: Emotional
healing and Physical/Sexual Abuse Recovery. As an inspirational
leader, Dr. Neddermeyer empowers people to view life's challenges
as an opportunity for Personal/Professional Growth and Spiritual
Awakening. http://www.drdorothy.net
Spanking a child can be detrimental to
his/her psychological health
|