If hitting kids traumatizes them (according to scientific research) should it be illegal?

Question

I do believe it is infringement on personal liberties, but often people believe that hitting their kids is good for the child despite any research to support this. The opposite is true, the more a child is hit the more likely they are to be unproductive members of a society.
Should the society protect children from their uneducated parents?

http://www.childadvocate.org/1a_research.htm

There is NO debate in the research

a few bible literalists that call themselves scientists do not count

Answer 1

physical discipline has negative consequences for children and the society as a whole. people who say that they turned out just fine most likely could have been turned out better! and any way he or she can't be the judge but the society and history should be the judge! physical discipline lowers the child's self esteem. parents who are not educated and/or have no patience and/or they can't control their anger( repeating the cycle) in order to use other methods that doesn't hurt try to justify their actions. it also looses its "effectiveness" as children get older. plus it gives a wrong message to the child that getting physical and violence is OK! they also tend to choose abusive partners since they don't see it as acceptable! parenting classes should be taught in school and a prerequisite for every parent. one must have a license to drive and why not a licence to raise a child since it is even a bigger responsibility! ie; if they continue hurting their child then their parenting license could be suspended, etc. peace

Answer 2

Yes it damn well should (the idea that there is scientific evidence of benefits of smacking is laughable, there is only evidence that it works in the short term (and long term harm) and even there it doesn't work any better than other methods), half a century ago there might have been enough doubt to say the issue was still open but this is about as close to resolved as things get in science.

There's no reason what so ever to hit a child, if a person needs to prevent a child from crossing a busy road they can pull the child back from the road but smacking them isn't going to do anything (unless they hit the kid hard enough to push them all the way to the other side but that would certainly qualify as child abuse).

Hitting a child also doesn't work any better than alternative methods of discipline in the short term (and those alternatives work better in the long term) making it completely unnecessary.

Realistically it'd probably be necessary not to bother enforcing the law very much but the mere existence of such a law could have a big effect on people and should scare a few of the bad parents into stopping. You'd also need to teach people how to do things better so that they can do things properly.

Kevin k: You're an idiot if think that hitting a child that is playing with electricity is of any use, you don't smack them, you pull them away from the power point and make sure they don't go back (not by hurting them but by picking them up and moving them away which won't hurt them).

Answer 3

You need to define "hitting" here. There are limits to the hitting allowed. Spanking a misbehaving child is acceptable-abusively striking a child is not.

For example, a swift swat on the butt of a 18 month old toddler who is playing with electrical outlets is rational. Not swatting the child or spanking the child 20 times for one incident are both unreasonable. The swat tells the child not to play with electricity; which is far more dangerous than a simple swat on the butt. However, beating a child to the point that welts and bruises appear to "drive the point home" is absolutely wrong.

The best method to correct bad behavior varies from child to child. Spanking a child is generally accepted if the parent remains calm and in control. Tanning a child's hide in a fit of rage is not acceptable ever. If you feel that striking your child repeatedly is the only way to get them to stop doing things they shouldn't; perhaps you need to try different methods of punishment.

Answer 4

confident, hitting does traumatize babies and babies (and different a while). i replaced into additionally hit, and those scars in no way extremely fade. the only ingredient that I recommend is going to a therapist. that is like having a scar, it does not fade that certainly the two, and that's precisely how a annoying experience is. i could seek for expert help in the present day, for me it replaced into too previous due. solid success!

Answer 5

I believe that one has to first separate hitting children from spanking children. I was never hit by my parents but I was spanked. I earned those spankings and I believe that it made me a better person. Society needs to do an excellent job of educating parents as to the best way to raise their children to be productive members of society.

Answer 6

There's also scientific research that shoes that kids benefit from corporal punishment. Should not using it be illegal?

The fact is that even scientists disagree, so it shoud, be up to each family to decide.

Richard

Answer 7

there should definately be limits, but if there's no viable consequence, wouldn't they be worse members of society because they don't understand limits or consequence?

Answer 8

i was smaked occasionaly as a kid.
i turned out just fine.