Strongest evidence yet against spanking

[luvsJack]

Thank you, themilesfamily.

I, for one, do not believe in the theory "we do it this way because we've always done it this way."

I believe that, when there is data and evidence, we should consider changing our views and our behaviors. Maybe we can IMPROVE how we've "always" done things. Maybe, just maybe, we can do BETTER.

Anyway, good luck with your message. And be prepared for LOTS of criticism. I've found, as you may know, from my posts about childhood immunizations, some folks around here don't care how much scientific evidence and proof you give them. They KNOW, they just KNOW what is best for their kids.

I have no problem what so ever in reading, considering and changing because of expert studies, opinions etc. Particularly when it comes to children. I have spent many years attending class after class on child development. I spent years changing the procedures in my center because of the latest study done or the latest techniques thought to be the best way to teach children or discipline children or handle certain developmental problems or whatever. The things I did when my own sons were babies (because that is what was considered "right" at the time) and the things I did 14 year later with my daughter were light years apart because the "experts" changed what they believed to be the rigth thing.

BUT, as a parent and as a child care giver who watched many children grow up--I also know what I know by my own observation and experience.

I don't do anything because it is what we have always done. I do it because I know that it works. And do I know what is best for my child? You are darn right I do. If I didn't, who would?

 

[Anjelica]

They KNOW, they just KNOW what is best for their kids.

Shouldn't a parent generally KNOW what is best for THEIR child? I mean I'm generally with my kids a majority of the time compared with other folks. I'm not of the mindset that "it takes a village". This doesn't mean I as an educated adult don't review studies/information that is published to make an informed decision. But as many posters have elluded to many/most studies done on a small scale and without black/white results can be skewed. Again, educated adults should (and most likely) take the time to research these things.

I don't think its bad that people agree/disagree on what they do or think is best for their child. But I guess what really grinds me is the "better than thou" attitude that comes across when folks disagree with each other. Seriously - I'm a morally corrupt person because I've swatted my son a few times? I certainly don't belittle folks who don't spank their children. Why is it acceptable for folks to say anything more than - well I don't agree with your opinion.

 

[Indiana Rose Lee]

The problem with rmost esearch is that is proves what people want it to prove, and there is usually an agenda and money trail not far behind. No one sets out to prove the norm is true, good or right. Research sets out to make a change, and really is far more connected to the need for tenured profs to be published, rather than give unbiased information.

LOL, and I do KNOW what has been right and best for each of my kids. They have all responded to different sorts of discipline. You may need someone to tell you what is best, but that is your issue.

 

[MusiqChic99]

I've always thought spanking is taking the easy way out. There are better ways to discipline/reward kids that take just a tiny bit more effort and are just as effective; if not more so.

These are my exact feelings on spanking.

And I always say "when it becomes legal for me to hit a ill behaved parent, then I will spank my child for his ill behavior"

 

[OK!]

I was spanked and I turned out just fine.

Me too!

 

[FireDancer]

The problem with rmost esearch is that is proves what people want it to prove, and there is usually an agenda and money trail not far behind. No one sets out to prove the norm is true, good or right. Research sets out to make a change, and really is far more connected to the need for tenured profs to be published, rather than give unbiased information.

LOL, and I do KNOW what has been right and best for each of my kids. They have all responded to different sorts of discipline. You may need someone to tell you what is best, but that is your issue.

As I posted on another thread there is plenty of research out there to justify either side of almost all arguments. This is true of discipline, prescription drugs, vaccinations, HFCS, sugar in general, artificial sweeteners, modified produce, and many more topics.

We all look at what is available and determine for ourselves what is the better information. That requires looking at the research methods, the agenda behind it, who funded the research and what their interests are in the results, and (most importantly) our own common sense.

People will make different determinations and come to different conclusions based on the same information because they have their own minds and there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't make one right and one wrong, it makes them different and nothing more.

There are many things I don't buy the "research" on because there is a lot of junk science out there and proving correlation (let alone causation) is almost impossible with all of the variables that come into play in most situations. In the end make your own conclusions.

 

[Deb in IA]

You may need someone to tell you what is best, but that is your issue.

No. My "issue" is that I use new information to try to do better.

How sad it would be if we never tried to do a better job, if we didn't care to try to improve?

 

[Had2stopLurking]

I think what was exciting for researchers about this latest study is that they were able to correct some of the weaknesses of earlier studies. They provided better controls and eliminated some of the variables between groups. (Thus the headline: "Strongest evidence yet against spanking" -- their words, not mine.)

I think we're all just trying to parent the best we can, but I think it's wrong to poo-poo the results of serious, peer-reviewed studies -- especially when so many are coming to the same conclusion.

If a person has never worked in a field that relies on research, (medicine, psychiatry, counseling, etc.), then I can see why it may not seem relevant. I do find research relevant and worth considering.

Once again, I will reiterate that I WORK with statistics and studies daily. Every study can be peer reviewed, but that doesn't make it RIGHT. Like I said earlier, I could do a study based on posts on here and plug it into SPSS and make my graph look exactly what I want it to look like. It could be peer reviewed based on my report and accepted, that doesn't make it publishable or credible.

I don't find this "article" credible in any way, shape or form. If one of my students tried to turn it in as "fact", we'd have a long talk about how statistics can be manipulated. If they are using it as evidence to support their side of something, that's different, but don't present it as "fact" because that would be an epic fail.

There are journal articles out there on both sides of the issue.

 

[Had2stopLurking]

As I posted on another thread there is plenty of research out there to justify either side of almost all arguments. This is true of discipline, prescription drugs, vaccinations, HFCS, sugar in general, artificial sweeteners, modified produce, and many more topics.

We all look at what is available and determine for ourselves what is the better information. That requires looking at the research methods, the agenda behind it, who funded the research and what their interests are in the results, and (most importantly) our own common sense.

People will make different determinations and come to different conclusions based on the same information because they have their own minds and there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't make one right and one wrong, it makes them different and nothing more.

There are many things I don't buy the "research" on because there is a lot of junk science out there and proving correlation (let alone causation) is almost impossible with all of the variables that come into play in most situations. In the end make your own conclusions.

 

[Indiana Rose Lee]

Once again, I will reiterate that I WORK with statistics and studies daily. Every study can be peer reviewed, but that doesn't make it RIGHT. Like I said earlier, I could do a study based on posts on here and plug it into SPSS and make my graph look exactly what I want it to look like. It could be peer reviewed based on my report and accepted, that doesn't make it publishable or credible.

I don't find this "article" credible in any way, shape or form. If one of my students tried to turn it in as "fact", we'd have a long talk about how statistics can be manipulated. If they are using it as evidence to support their side of something, that's different, but don't present it as "fact" because that would be an epic fail.

There are journal articles out there on both sides of the issue.

Thank you.

I think that people forget that studies are paid for by grants. Grants are available through groups that have agendas. Pure and simple.

I've been involved in research, grant writing and manipulating data. It is justified because one believes in the cause.

As for parenting and life decisions, I guess that if one hasn't had good expamples I would lean towards mentoring as opposed to jumping on the research band wagon. There is always going to be another study because there always will be people with the need to impress and be published. It is a fact of life.

 

[luvsJack]

No. My "issue" is that I use new information to try to do better.

How sad it would be if we never tried to do a better job, if we didn't care to try to improve?

But why the assumption that anyone who does/has spanked a child doesn't try to do a better job or try to improve?

I believe differently than you do. My experience and observations have apparently proven something different to me than yours have to you. Doesn't make anyone a bad parent, not intelligent, not willing to learn or any of those things that those that do not believe in spanking like to believe me to be.

 

[themilesfamily]

I think that people forget that studies are paid for by grants. Grants are available through groups that have agendas.

The latest study was conducted by Tulane University and published in the Journal of Pediatrics.

What would their agenda be?

A 2009 study that came to the same conclusions was done at Duke University and published in the Journal of Child Development.

How about the 2008 study at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine?

Or the 1997 study at the University of New Hampshire?

I could go on and on. All came to the same conclusions.

These are academic institutions and publications that set the standard in their field.

 

[Had2stopLurking]

The latest study was conducted by Tulane University and published in the Journal of Pediatrics.

What would their agenda be?

Depends on where the grant came from. Anyone who's had to undergo the torturing process of getting grants know they need to be funded by SOMEONE. You have to write a grant proposal and submit it to several places. The universities don't just go "hey, we want to study this, let's do it". The funds simply aren't available and there are MANY hours of grant writing proposals involved in getting grants; therefore, you gear the proposal to a company that wants you to have certain findings. The highest grant is the winner and any stats can manipulate that.

In my graduate thesis, I didn't even come close to proving my hypothesis, but, I funded it and did it myself. I found a lot of info that some undergrads were able to build on, but my hypothesis proved to be wrong. I'm ok with that and am glad some students can take my findings for certain things and expand them. THAT is real research!

Sometimes universities are NOT OK with a funded study to be found false. I didn't want to deal with that, so I funded mine myself. I was disappointed in the results, but, you know what? I got over it and learned a TON about proper research and how to mentor students to do research and statistics.

 

[Indiana Rose Lee]

Depends on where the grant came from. Anyone who's had to undergo the torturing process of getting grants know they need to be funded by SOMEONE. You have to write a grant proposal and submit it to several places. The universities don't just go "hey, we want to study this, let's do it". The funds simply aren't available and there are MANY hours of grant writing proposals involved in getting grants; therefore, you gear the proposal to a company that wants you to have certain findings. The highest grant is the winner and any stats can manipulate that.

In my graduate thesis, I didn't even come close to proving my hypothesis, but, I funded it and did it myself. I found a lot of info that some undergrads were able to build on, but my hypothesis proved to be wrong. I'm ok with that and am glad some students can take my findings for certain things and expand them. THAT is real research!

Sometimes universities are NOT OK with a funded study to be found false. I didn't want to deal with that, so I funded mine myself. I was disappointed in the results, but, you know what? I got over it and learned a TON about proper research and how to mentor students to do research and statistics.

bingo.

 

[themilesfamily]

Depends on where the grant came from. Anyone who's had to undergo the torturing process of getting grants know they need to be funded by SOMEONE.

So you're suggesting that researchers at Tulane University, Duke University, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill AND the University of New Hampshire all knowingly and willingly manipulated their research and outcomes for monetary reasons?

ETA: I was just looking at the funding for grants at my grad school alma mater, (the University of Virginia), it looks like they have an internal fund that professors can apply to for grants. They do allow professors to take some outside grant money, but it appears they limit it and it must go through the Office of the Vice President for Research.

 

[Had2stopLurking]

So you're suggesting that researchers at Tulane University, Duke University, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill AND the University of New Hampshire all knowingly and willingly manipulated their research and outcomes for monetary reasons?

I went to UNC. That's all I have to say about that.

 

[Anjelica]

I think what was exciting for researchers about this latest study is that they were able to correct some of the weaknesses of earlier studies. They provided better controls and eliminated some of the variables between groups. (Thus the headline: "Strongest evidence yet against spanking" -- their words, not mine.)

Hmm..I did a quick search on the published study on the AAP site searching for recent published studies. It showed, which I believe is the one you put out there, as published on April 12th of this year. When you look at the study though the years it appears to cover is 1998-2005. Around 5 years old is not "latest" study.

"Methods Respondents (N = 2461) participated in the Fragile Families and Child Well-being Study (1998–2005), a population-based, birth cohort study of children born in 20 large US cities."

http://pediatrics.aappublications.o...INDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

The objective (I could be reading it wrong but seems a tad bit "loaded" in terms of objective):

"Objective The goal was to examine the association between the use of corporal punishment (CP) against 3-year-old children and subsequent aggressive behavior among those children. "

 

[Had2stopLurking]

Hmm..I did a quick search on the published study on the AAP site searching for recent published studies. It showed, which I believe is the one you put out there, as published on April 12th of this year. When you look at the study though the years it appears to cover is 1998-2005. Around 5 years old is not "latest" study.

"Methods Respondents (N = 2461) participated in the Fragile Families and Child Well-being Study (1998–2005), a population-based, birth cohort study of children born in 20 large US cities."

http://pediatrics.aappublications.o...INDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

The objective (I could be reading it wrong but seems a tad bit "loaded" in terms of objective):

"Objective The goal was to examine the association between the use of corporal punishment (CP) against 3-year-old children and subsequent aggressive behavior among those children. "

Please don't try to discredit this "fact" article with logic and basis. Fox News would never be able to use it if you do. I demand you stop using logical though this instance young lady

 

[themilesfamily]

I went to UNC. That's all I have to say about that.

I've always heard GOOD things about UNC!

UVA was loaded with money, LOADED -- so they may be unique in that they have internal funding for research.

 

[Indiana Rose Lee]

Has anyone been able to trace the funding? My eyes are tired. Tulane and Ms. Taylor are pretty silent on that one. And that carefully written article is the only thing out there on this research that I can find. (Granted, my glasses are broken, and I'm out of sorts.)

I would also add that the most recent climate for boys is that they should be like girls. Any natural aggressiveness is seen as a problem rather than a trait that should be molded. Unless they are on the football field, when they are supposed to channel it, lol.

eta: jftr, my kids are not allowed to hurt one another! By channeling, I mean that my rowdier kids would be sent on a run, or down to the punching bag, not told they were/are evil for feeling what they were feeling.