Spanking, slapping, swatting, hitting, beating. Is one better than another? Aren’t they all just the same variation on a theme? I’ve heard the arguments; I’ve listened to the justifications. I understand it is open to interpretation. Some parents think those words represent a huge spectrum of actions against the child ranging from the necessary to the abusive. Some parents see them all as the same.
I’ve heard parents threaten their child with a “beating” or suggest “If you don’t stop right now, I’m gonna beat your butt,” or other even less pleasant threats. Whether they follow through or even intend to follow through, clearly these parents see beating and spanking in the same light.
I’ve heard parents who claim that their spankings are limited only to the buttocks and are not intended to cause pain and definitely not marks. These parents don’t consider spanking to be a form of violence and they consider the consequence of the spanking to be positive, not negative. Spanking is a good form of behavior modification, they say.
I have to say, when I tell my child to stop hitting his brother and he turns around and pushes or bites him instead, I get pretty upset. I’m not big on loopholes. I expect that my children understand that when I say “no hitting,” I mean “no aggressive behavior, period.” They test their limits as toddlers but, for the most part, they know better. And they are children.
I feel the same way about the justifications that parents use for spanking. Parents don’t hit children – it is against the law; it is called child abuse. But, just because a parent puts rules or limits around the word “hitting” in order to call it a new word, “spanking”, to justify why it is better or different than the word “hitting” doesn’t necessarily make it all that different.
Why do people hit? They feel out of control, they have anger management issues, they can’t relay or work through their feelings in appropriate ways, they have a desire to seek revenge or punish someone for any myriad of reasons, they want to “teach a lesson” and to strike fear in the victim.
Why do parents spank? They have lost control, some spank out of anger, others spank because they have a desire to punish the child for any myriad of reasons, they want the child to feel fearful and they want to “teach a lesson”.
The reasons behind any form of violence are pretty universal whether we call that violence hitting or spanking. Spanking is intended to teach a lesson. It DOES teach a lesson. The lesson, a parent hopes, is “I should think twice before doing xyz in the future.” However, we know enough about human nature to understand that we humans don’t learn that way. Instead we learn “I better make sure I don’t get caught next time,” or “Hitting is ok,” or “When I do xyz, I get spanked,” or even “I hate her for spanking me, I did nothing wrong!” – none of which are useful lessons. None of these lessons act to strengthen a child’s internal barometer of right and wrong, good and bad, self-control or self-discipline.
So, is it a healthy parenting goal to strive to teach our children to fear us? Is this ok? What happens when we aren’t around? What happens when they are grown and on their own and they no longer fear us? What will be the internal compass that guides them toward right and wrong? Do we really beleive that simply fearing authority is enough to make a person fundamentally kind, honest, trustworthy, virtuous, moral and ethical?
When has hitting ever been an answer? It isn’t. And, spanking, we have learned, is not an answer either. Whether they are the same or not, one is not better than the other.