|
Comments
in Bold from an article by Lonnit Rysher, editor of Breastfeeding and Attachment
Parenting, Instinctively.
"Did you know that in some countries it is
illegal to spank? In the US it is common to spank children,
but you better watch out because you might be getting a visit from Child
Protective Services! Nowadays, Kids are even reporting their own parents!
Maybe you don't think you are "abusing" your child especially if
you never "left a mark" but the most damaging "marks"
do not necessarily scar the child's body, but his or her psyche."
Comments in Green
Italics by Mark Benedict, editor of Christian Parent's Network website.
The laws of a country address the collective opinion of what is wise and
expedient in the eyes of the citizenry.
The law does not always reflect what is moral and upright in the
sight of God. The laws in
Nazi Germany under Hitler required patriotic Germans to turn in Jews to be
exterminated in the gas chambers. The fact that it was the law of the land did not change the
inherent wickedness of an immoral practice.
The fact that humanistic arrogance leads some countries to
interfere in the God-given rights of parents to discipline children in
accordance with the time-honored and Biblically proscribed method does not
make spanking immoral. A
foolish law does not establish morality, any more than a wicked law makes
wicked behavior moral.
Abortion
is legal, but who can seriously argue that is not immoral? No law can change the fact that it is an act against our
Creator to destroy unborn children in the womb.
As to the European countries who’ve taken the lead in
criminalizing spanking, you cannot draw conclusions about the morality of
spanking based on their laws because laws can be changed to suit the whims
of rulers and governments.
Laws
may or may not reflect the truth, for this depends on the moral
foundations of the leaders making the laws.
The Christian believes that the Bible is a more reliable and
accurate revelation of morality than changing laws. For many years western
nations have based their laws on the teaching of Scripture. It was the
emphasis on Biblical morality that provided the spiritual and cultural
underpinnings for the majority of the material and social progress in the
west. Western civilization is
now in decline. Given the
recent disdain modern man has shown for the Bible’s teaching on
marriage, faithfulness, and the rights of God over His creation it is not
surprising to see that western law is growing hostile against time-honored
practices and traditions that are clearly taught in scripture. Neither is
it a surprise that as western nations reject Biblical morality that we are
witnessing a tremendous surge in moral and behavioral problems.
As many spankings
opponents do, Ms. Rysher assumes what she aims to prove, and then reasons
from her assumption without bothering to establish the evidence for her
position. We get just a
little hint of how strong she opposes spanking by the hint of delight she
expresses in the thought of parents fearing a visit from Child Protective
Services, as if this would somehow make them better parents.
Does she believe that
Child Protective Services will do a better job of raising children than
loving parents? Would anyone seriously believe that governmental agencies
such as Child Protective Services are better qualified to raise children
than the children’s own parents? Her reasoning suggest that not only
does the government know better about discipline, but kids who report
their parents for spanking also know better than their parents.
Ms. Rysher apparently sees
nothing wrong with the situation created by anti-spanking legislation
where children report their parents for spanking.
She sees no middle ground between parents who discipline their
children with reason and love, as prescribed by the Bible, and those who
strike their children in anger and rage. This is a common tactic with
spanking opponents. They lump
genuinely abusive parents with normal, loving parents together as one
group. This, despite the fact
that that the majority of children who are disciplined in love by caring
parents turn out to be healthy and well adjusted individuals.
There is a difference, both in motives and result, and it is
disingenuous to imply otherwise. There
have been scientific studies showing long-term benefits in children who
were spanked in a caring atmosphere, but anti-spanking proponents dismiss
these studies on the basis of their preconceptions.
What shall we make of her dire
warnings below on the consequences of spanking to children?
"The damage might not be apparent at first, but it may
sit there like a ticking time bomb. It can affect their self-esteem and
their personal relationships for the rest of their lives when their
unnatural confusion between love and pain causes them to seek out abusive
partners. "
What is this unnatural
confusion between love and pain that makes them seek out abusive partners?
A properly disciplined child has no confusion over the reason for
their pain. What research has
established the damaging effects? For every research project showing
damaging effects you can find another research project leading to the
opposite conclusion. Experts
have genuine differences. Many
research projects arrive at these conclusions because are biased in the
study methodology. They fail
to distinguish between parents who spank effectively from parents who are
simply unloving and uncaring.
One reason there is little
research on spanking conducted in a scientific manner is that there is
little built in financial incentive for the behavioral scientific
community to prove a traditional remedy such as spanking works.
Spanking empowers parents to solve their children’s behavioral
without professional intervention. There are well documented and carefully
conducted professional studies which receive little public notice because
the conclusions are not popular.
"Psychiatrists & child experts have recently come
to acknowledge the damaging effects of spanking, and have begun
recommending against physical punishment. The most ironic discovery they
have made is that spanking as a form of discipline just doesn't work!"
To her first generalization I would
reply that some psychiatrists and child experts have recently come to
acknowledge the damaging effects of not spanking children when they need
it. The fact is that there is no consensus among the psychiatric
community on the best way to discipline children. The author cites no reputable statistics or studies, just her
opinion. She attributes her
opinion that spanking as a form of discipline doesn’t work to having
been recently discovered by psychiatrists and experts without providing
evidence. This is not exactly
an application of the scientific method.
It is equally valid for me to provide my opinion that spanking is
very effective when properly done.
"I have spoken to dozens of people who were spanked as
children and they tell me the same exact thing over and over... "Yes,
I remember being spanked, but I don't remember for what." The
"lessons" were lost. Many of these same people also stated that
their spankings actually made them feel rebellious! Our jails are filled
with criminals who were spanked as children."
Oh
reader, I challenge you to ask dozens of people the exact same question
and get the exact same answer over and over.
I’m afraid the reader is not being intellectually honest here.
If I went to my church and asked a dozen members their views on
disciplining children I might get 8 of the 12 who substantially agreed in
the contents of their answers, although it would never be phrased exactly
the same unless I asked them a leading question or a multiple choice
answer. If I knew that a
dozen of those people shared my views and then asked that dozen I might be
able to stack the answers in a way that make the results agreeable.
If I were to ask a truly random cross section of the public,
however, I would never get the exact same answer from dozens of people.
It is fairly evident that Ms. Rysher has either deliberately or
accidentally stacked the deck of her panel of dozens by selecting a jury
favorable to her point of view. Yet she acts as though her informal panel of experts is a
formidable argument.
So
what if I can get a ten or a hundred people to agree on something?
In Nazi Germany Hitler’s propaganda machine was able to marshal
public opinion in support of their official policy of exterminating Jews.
If morality is a function of public consensus, then the Nazi
actions were moral! If
morality is based on unchanging principles then it matters not how many
agree, wrong is wrong!
"Okay, so maybe your child won't end up in jail, but
don't be surprised to see him hitting his little sister, or becoming the
playground bully, believing that "might makes right". By
spanking your child you are sending the message that it is acceptable to
overpower someone smaller than yourself."
Why wouldn’t a child perceive
instead that righteous authority protects
the rights and interests of the weak? Parents who discipline effectively demonstrate
tyranny and aggression will not be tolerated by representatives of
just government! If you are
stopped for speeding and have to pay $100.00, are the police teaching you
to be a spend thrift with your money? Are they teaching you to be
wasteful? After you pay the fine, will you have an irresistible urge to start giving money away? The answer, of
course, is no! You are fined for speeding to get your attention and to
restrain your behavior. The
same principle applies to discipline. Biblical spanking is an act of love
designed to change a child's behavior (Proverbs 13:14, 29:17).
"Did you ever notice that bullies never pick on people
bigger than themselves? Well, not unless they are in a gang picking on an
individual, but once again there is an unfair advantage by outnumbering
the victim."
There is no evidence to
support this view other than the author’s desire to wish it were so.
There is a hidden assumption underlying the author’s reasoning.
That assumption is that there is no difference in results between
the parent who spanks using controlled discipline and the parent that
strikes out in anger or frustration.
What is so strange about this whole line of reasoning is that there
is hardly a parent alive over the age of 40 years old who cannot remember
being spanked! Yet we never
learned to be bullies from being spanked! I believe it is much more typical for bullies to develop
because they have not been effectively disciplined by their parents.
"Parents set an example for their children by their
actions. Spanking teaches that hitting is an acceptable way to express
feelings and resolve problems. The most ludicrous thing I've ever seen is
the mother who spanks her child for hitting his sibling! Now, did that
actually make any sense? Did it resolve anything?"
Why is it impossible to
believe that spanking teaches the child that authority will not tolerate
the abuse of the weak by those stronger?
Where does a child learn the concept of justice if parents do not
demonstrate it in the home? It is the child’s acceptance of the rightful
exercise of God-given parental authority that prepares the child to accept
the authority of the state. Ms.
Rysher believes that a child is not smart enough to understand the concept
of benevolent authority exercised to protect society from antisocial
behavior, yet she believes that the child will respond favorably to
“instinctive, gentle, parenting.”
Practically speaking what does she mean? What actions will change
the child’s behavior?
"Too often it is forgotten that children and babies are
people too. Why would you treat a child is such a disrespectful way as you
would never treat another adult? The following is the most effective
example I've ever heard, that points out how inane and unacceptable
spanking is. Just replace the word "child" with the word
"wife" in any scenario you can think of which involves spanking.
If someone hit their wife for spilling the milk, or breaking
a dish or whatever action that might typically result in the spanking of a
child, you'd certainly think him a brute, a monster. You'd want to get
that woman removed from that situation as soon as possible. Everyone
agrees that spousal abuse of that sort is unacceptable so why is it
tolerated, even condoned, when the victim is a child? Would you ever dream
of telling your grown son to hit his wife? Then why would you tell him
that his child needs a "swat on the bottom"?"
This line of reasoning is
absurd! A child responds to the world differently from an adult. What is
appropriate for an adult is not appropriate for a child!
Ms. Rysher also further muddies the argument by using an example
inappropriate for a reasoned discussion about child discipline.
First, in an attempt to color the argument she uses the word
“hit” in her ridiculous example of a parent hitting their child for
spilling milk! No parent
should “hit” a child! Hitting
and spanking are not the same. Hitting
is an emotional response that is uncontrolled.
Opponents of spanking will not acknowledge the difference between a
spanking (which is a reasoned application of force appropriate to specific
behaviors) and the violent and uncontrolled actions of an abusive parent.
It is dishonest to lump them together.
Secondly, no parent with
an adequate understanding of the Biblical principles of child training
would ever spank a child for spilling milk or breaking a dish!
Ms. Rysher attempts to paint an unflattering picture of parents who
spank by deliberately choosing a ridiculous example of discipline.
This is a dishonest tactic, which insinuates that all parents who
spank are harsh and demanding.
"What happens when the spanking doesn't work? It
can lead to more frustration on the part of the parents, who find it more
and more difficult to control their anger and spanking escalates into
beating. It is virtually impossible to be angry enough to be brought the
point of spanking, yet be calm enough to control the intensity of your
swats."
Ms. Rysher believes that
no parent could find it in themselves to spank unless they are propelled
to a violent anger first. On
the contrary, parents who discipline effectively spank on the basis of
clearly defined rules, not on their feelings of the moment.
They spank their children for acts of disobedience, defiance, and
rebellion. They need not be
angry to spank, just as policeman need not be angry to arrest a
lawbreaker. Officers of the law have a duty to enforce the law,
regardless of their personal feelings.
Effective parents may not “feel” like spanking their children,
but they do it enforce the moral law God has revealed in scripture.
"If you claim that you "never hit in anger" and
wait until later to deliver the "punishment", then the "punishment" will
be less effective because too much time has gone by in the child's mind
for the action to be associated with the "punishment. "
Ms. Rysher neatly wraps up the parent who
spanks in a box of her own making. Is
it coercive to force citizens to follow the law or face the consequences?
"Our newspapers are filled with stories of such
adolescents who, once the boiling point has been reached, strike out
murderously against their parents or devastate the community in a deadly
assault upon their schoolmates."
A careful examination of
these adolescents more often than not will show a pattern of missing or
inconsistent discipline. See
the book by Police
Detective Robert Surgenor for detailed statistics showing that violent
children are more likely to have never been spanked or effectively
disciplined by their parents. It
is curious, that today when spanking is less prevalent than any other time
in our history, we are seeing so many more of these incidents.
Spanking in society is on the decrease, yet violent acts by
children are on the increase. Hmm…so we should believe that spanking,
which is practiced less, is causing more violence?
Yet 30 years ago when nearly all parents spanked we had much less
violence? How much sense does
that make?
"The spanking cycle often perpetuates itself
down the generations until at last, someone finally wakes up and says
"I'm not going to do that to my children".
They realize that what they experienced at the hands of
their parents didn't feel right, because it wasn't right. "
Ms.
Rysher, your children are less than 4 years old at the time of this
writing so you may have the opportunity to rethink your views between now
and the time when your children become adults.
I spanked my children and they thank me for it today as young
adults, 23, and 20 at this writing. They
have both been successful in their academic careers, while providing great
joy to my wife and myself. Other
adults are always impressed by their demeanor and the warm relationship we
enjoy today. Both of our children have stated their intent to follow the
same methods of discipline we used on them with their own children.
Mark Benedict
|
