Corporal punishment on children by thier parents.

Apologies for the FF. Responses to Con:There seems to be a misunderstanding of the difference between appropriate corporal punishment and physical abuse demonstrated by some critics of corporal punishment. I'd liken it to confusing eating desert, and gluttony. Both are eating, and both can be gluttony, but eating desert is not always gluttonous. This is pointed out well in the JRank article Con cited. The article is Causes of Crime. Under the heading "Parental Relations," abuse is discussed, but nowhere is corporal punishment mentioned. The assumption on Con's part is that they are one and the same. Abuse is meant to harm. And even if corporal punishment is harmful and abusive, it has been commonly used for hundreds of years in many cultures by parents who are intending the best for their children. The appropriate corporal punishment is not meant to harm, but to discipline. That is the big difference. It seems to be modern journalistic practice to splash a headline, lead in with evidence supporting that headline, then near the end of the article, (when many people have stopped reading?) temper the stated point with evidence to the contrary (So the author can say they included everything?) (Maybe. Topic for another discussion.) In the USA Today article, this is just the case. The first few lines strongly support the headline, but near the middle of the article, we see this:"A 2005 scientific review he co-authored, of studies comparing spanking with non-physical discipline methods, identified an "optimal type of physical discipline," referred to as conditional spanking, and said that when it was used as a backup to nonphysical discipline it was better at reducing noncompliance and antisocial behavior.While the new study rules out the most severe cases of physically lashing out at children, , "it does nothing to move beyond correlations to figure out what is actually causing the mental health problems," says Larzelere. He criticized the study's reliance on memories of events from years earlier, and says it's not clear when punishment occurred. "The motivation that the child perceives and when and how and why the parent uses (spanking) makes a big difference. All of that is more important than whether it was used or not."The end result may often be a misled reader.Another misunderstanding I'd like to point out from the Dave Ramsey quotes: There is no mention of financial discipline (or other types) being used as a total replacement for corporal discipline. Just because he is using one type, does not mean he isn't using others. And just because a parent uses corporal punishment, doesn't mean they ONLY use corporal punishment. I grew up being spanked, but that wasn't the only punishment. Sometimes my parents just let me live with the consequences of my actions, sometimes they denied me TV, sent me to bed early, or plainly let me know they were disappointed in me. Corporal punishent may be appropriate, but like everything, knowing when and how to use it is important to making it appropriate.The Consequences of Pain article doesn't even touch corporal punishment, only chronic physical pain. If CHRONIC pain results from a spanking, your doing it wrong, and it is abuse or a very bad accident. Spanking, etc., is supposed to be temporary to encourage the child to correct behavior, not spank them and expect them to do it again.And Disciplining Your Child doesn't really cite reasons for advising against physical discipline.When I talked about children not knowing what is good for them beyond instinct, I tried to be clear that physical discipline is only appropriate once the child can act on their own and understand reasons for discipline. Maybe I didn't do such a good job in R2 in that respect.My arguments:I guess I'm still going to have to clean up some misunderstandings here, too. Physical discipline needs to be administered in a proper way. As the USA Today article said, it needs to be alongside other forms of discipline, the parent should not be angry when administering it so the child does not think they are being assaulted out of anger, or that it is a fight with the parent, and so the parent doesn't go too far, and so the child knows it is usually wrong to act out of angery aggression. The child needs to understand what they are being punished for and why, (understand the actions are just and so the kid understands what right and wrong is) and that the parent cares for them and is disciplining them for their own good. (To preserve the relationship. Good advice for any type of discipline.)Corporal punishment is not a cure-all, and not to be used in anger just because the parent doesn't like the child. That wouldn't teach the kid anything, just to fight.Corporal punishment is a good tool for loving parents to use, when used appropriately.