• I think it certainly is - saying it isn't is either wishful thinking, or playing with semantics. Anything that involves non-playful hitting of a child, is beating, period. I'm not saying spanking is wrong, or right, I'm just saying people should stop deluding themselves.
  • At the point where spanking is done for inconsequential that could of been handled with a stern talking to. A kid should only be spanked 1 or twice when they've done something bad without regret and are pitching a fit about it.
  • I think that striking a child is wrong, as my own personal preference. I also think that "spanking" and "beating" are two very different concepts. This method of physical discipline may be detrimental to a child, but adults who remember these experiences will have markedly different attitudes toward past "spankings" versus "beatings"... Spankings doesn't connote that sense of horror and abuse.
  • there is nothing wrong with a spanking with just an open hand, never take a belt or wooden spoon to them. but a spanken or 2 on the butt, i would never do it any place else.
  • there are 2 differences between spanking and beating a child: first, if it is a release for your anger it is beating (you will probably be angry but that can not be the reason for the spanking.) second, if there is any long term physical damage it is beating. children must learn to obey starting as toddlers, for this disobedience must have unpleasant concequences. if the spanking doesn't hurt you might as well not have done it because it comes across as play. spanking only if they got into danger will do nothing because it is so rare they will not see a pattern to learn from. them knowing how to obey can save their life, spanking after the fact will not.
  • a social worker with a 2 or 4 year degree from a third rate college throws a dart on a dart board and decides whether it's abuse or not. actually, they usually focus on things associated with abuse, like alcoholism, prior criminal history, previous domestic violence, unemployability, medical and psychological symptoms that the child manifests, etc.
  • Thank you! I am honored. I am not against a child receiving a spanking for doing something that will harm themselves, another person or an animal for that matter. But first you try to teach. When teaching fails, one or two swats on the fanny should suffice. Using an item to strike a child is sooooo wrong. Not for petty things such as making a mistake or spilling a drink.
  • I am firmly against spanking or other forms of corporal punishment. I once heard a radio program discussing this. The expert consensus was that spanking was appropriate in a NARROW range of ages (somewhere around 4 to 8, I don't remember exactly) and NEVER in anger. Yet my real-world experience (and I'm sure that of many others) is that parents spank their children based on their anger level and regardless of age. This disconnect between when/how spanking is actually effective and when/how is is actually used in most cases tells me we need to abandon it. Note: I am OK with a single appropriate-force swat (on the buttocks or similarly non-sensitive region) as an EMERGENCY *attention-focusing tool*. I recognize that sometimes you need to get a child's attention RIGHT NOW before he/she runs in front of that oncoming bus. But it should be restricted to critical situations like that.
  • I don't believe in spanking/beating/humiliating/abusing a child at all. I equate spanking to physical abuse..I don't care what parents believe is "good" for the child..I don't care that "well, my parents spanked me and I turned o.k."..You did not turn out o.k .if you think it is o.k. to hit your child! :(
  • Setting aside the moral, ethical, and personal preferences of the issue, to decide if spanking = beating you need to look at the laws in your particle country. Here, spanking is currently illegal , therefore it would equate to the same as beating your child, other places have guide lines as to what they see as acceptable corporal punishment. If you live in America you might be interested in this site,
  • I made my children come to me for a "potch" which was a swat in the fanny and then they had to go to their room. This was back when a bedroom was a bedroom and not an entertainment headquarter. It was one and only one swat....they also got a slap on the hand after being told do not touch and they continued to do so. They were talked to not screamed at. Most important....if they misbehaved in public, such as a store, the next time they would not be allowed to go. Never and I mean never were my children allowed to run around at an eating establishment. The disrespect that children show is the result of poor parenting.
  • well im still a kid, but i say that if a child is caught with his hand in the cookie jar, him!!! its not beating him. lol, ok, lets see, if you want your child to do watever he wants, be spoiled, never no discipline until hes to old to be taught why he receives it, then yea, go ahead, dont him, but if you want a kid who is well behaved and disciplined, him wen he does wrong. beating a child is wen you have no good reason to whip a child, and you do it so hard that it causes permanent damage, punishing a child by ing is teaching them a lesson and showing them that wat they did was wrong
  • No... See . Anything more IS "beating". (That's MY line.) The parents SHOULD be able to draw the line, but I've seen a LOT of parents overdo it, even in public. One or two swats on the butt (especially in public... And there, more for surprise than punishment) is NOT beating, nor is it really a spanking. Even THEN some spank too hard for the age involved. If real welts (not just redness) are left, that's the line. They've gone too far.
  • What I always say: If it hurts more than a rough high five, you are doing it wrong. If you have to do it more than half a dozen times in the kid's lifetime, you are using it wrong.
  • Spanking is always on the buttocks; the largest muscle on the child's body and the least likely to cause accidental harm. Otherwise its an even lighter blow to the palm of the hand, which is a slap. If you do it with anything but a flat hand, that's beating. If you use a tool like a belt or paddle, that's beating. If you do it anywhere else on the body, that's beating. If you do it in anger, that's beating. If you do it in revenge or pleasure that's definitely beating. Spanking is only spanking when its measured, calm, and done in love for the child as the swiftest most easily healed punishment available for the circumstances, and a punishment that the child already understood would be the consequence of certain behaviours before they decided to act. Its a spank when the child doesn't have to worry whether mummy/daddy still loves them, or what's going to happen next, or whether they are a horrible child, but instead when the child can immediately turn to the parent who dished out the punishment for support and comfort and help to get over the upset.
  • spanking is beating, you never have to lay a finger on your child just talk to them and explain what they did was wrong and why it's wrong just call supernanny.
  • whoops, i made many typos in my other answer, lol just wanted to point that out, stuff like no instead of know, yea i know the difference. lol surely you understand what i mean
  • When a child just refuses to listen or is in danger, the road, the stove, etc, a spank on the butt with your hand is good. Wakes them up. They think "hey, I'd better not do that again"! I would never punch a child, hit one in the face or with an object. There are so many other ways to control a child. Oh, I draw the line with my kids, no one can beat them, ever. Even if they're 60 years old, no one.
  • I do not nor shall not "spank" or "beat" my child. The most I have done, was when he was about to put his hand on a red hot oven door after I had told him not to do so, was to shout very loud to jolt him out of his path then make him sit down. He cried as he is not used to being shouted at but he does not go near that oven now for fear of being shouted at again. If you constantly shout at a child it instills no fear in them as they grow accustomed to it and if they are in true danger the result may be that your cries for them not to do something will result in disaster.
  • At worst = a potentially life-long 'disadvantage'. At best = counterproductive.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy