Corporal Punishment (part 3)

Effective Discipline to Raise Healthy Children

American Academy of Pediatrics

Abstract

Pediatricians are a source of advice for parents and guardians concerning the management of child behavior, including discipline strategies that are used to teach appropriate behavior and protect their children and others from the adverse effects of challenging behavior. Aversive disciplinary strategies, including all forms of corporal punishment and yelling at or shaming children, are minimally effective in the short-term and not effective in the long-term. With new evidence, researchers link corporal punishment to an increased risk of negative behavioral, cognitive, psychosocial, and emotional outcomes for children. In this Policy Statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics provides guidance for pediatricians and other child health care providers on educating parents about positive and effective parenting strategies of discipline for children at each stage of development as well as references to educational materials. This statement supports the need for adults to avoid physical punishment and verbal abuse of children.

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/6/e20183112

Corporal Punishment (part 2)

A major 2002 meta-analysis of 88 studies found associations between lawful corporal punishment by parents and ten negative outcomes, and a major 2016 meta-analysis, which used 75 studies published over 50 years, involving a total of 160,927 children, confirmed the findings of the earlier meta-analysis and found evidence of associations with five more negative outcomes. 

The large and consistent body of evidence on the topic includes studies using sophisticated techniques which researchers have employed to address the arguments advanced by a few opponents of prohibition.

The body of evidence is now overwhelming – more than 250 studies show associations between corporal punishment and a wide range of negative outcomes, while no studies have found evidence of any benefits.

The met-analysis, which involved 88 studies, found associations between physical punishment and the following ten negative “behaviours and experiences”:

• poor moral internalisation (child is less likely to learn the intended lesson)
• poor quality of relationship between parent and child
• mental health problems in childhood
• aggression in childhood
• delinquent and antisocial behaviour in childhood
• child being a victim of “abuse”
• aggression and violence when adult
• criminal or anti-social behaviour when adult
• mental health problems when adult
• abusing child or spouse when adult

In 2016, Gershoff and Andrew Grogan-Kaylor published a second major meta-analysis, which used 75 studies published over 50 years, involving a total of 160,927 children.

It found associations between corporal punishment and 13 negative outcomes, confirming associations with all eight of the ten undesirable outcomes from the earlier meta-analysis which were covered and finding associations between corporal punishment and another five undesirable outcomes not included in the earlier meta-analysis:

• externalizing behaviour problems in childhood
• internalizing behaviour problems in childhood
• impaired cognitive activity in childhood
• low self-esteem in childhood
• holding positive attitudes about “spanking” as an adult

excerpted from:

Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences

Corporal punishment of children: review of research on its impact and associations.Working paper, June 2016

Corporal Punishment (part 1)

For the purpose of distinguishing between Corporal Punishment (CP) and Physical Abuse, I will use the definition of corporal punishment as defined by Straus (1994a). 

“Corporal punishment is the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or control of the child’s behavior”

I consider anything beyond this limited definition of CP to be physical abuse. 

Physical abuse as defined by the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (2000), is: "Physical abuse is characterized by the infliction of physical injury as a result of punching, beating, kicking, biting, burning, shaking or otherwise harming a child. The parent or caretaker may not have intended to hurt the child, rather the injury may have resulted from over-discipline or physical punishment. (What Are the Main Types of Maltreatment? section, para. 2)" 

Just to be clear, I'm personally and professional opposed to the use of corporal punishment and physical abuse. This is my bias.  I make every effort to focus on helping parents develop constructive methods for addressing unwanted behaviors and for teaching children the adaptive behaviors, values, and character traits they will need to become successful adults. 

Parents have approximately 6,600 days between birth and age 18 to gradually guide their children toward adulthood. Unless someone is on fire or gushing blood - there is no emergency or critical behavior that needs to be 'fixed' right this moment with the use of physical force.  Take a step-back, take a breath, relax, and make a coherent and constructive plan.      

Neither corporal punishment nor physical abuse is effective in correcting children's behavior. 

Punishments, even severe punishments, only serve to suppress an unwanted behavior within a specific situational context, but not elsewhere in the child's life.  Suppressing an unwanted behavior does nothing to address underlying drivers or to teach new, adaptive behaviors.  Suppression is temporary.  The behavior will be back.  Many parents find this to be very frustrating, contributing to an ever increasing level of punishment severity. 

Corporal Punishment should never be utilized to address children's behavior, except only under the direct supervision and guidance of a team of highly qualified professionals to address a very specific set of severe and extreme behaviors. 

If your family is struggling with this level of severity, please do consult with a team of highly trained and highly qualified medical and behavioral experts.

Kenneth H. Little, MA / 135 Lee Brook Road / Thornton, NH 03285 / 603-726-1006 / Achieve-ES.com

Misused Term: Consequences!

Consequences are not what we think they are.  

Consequences are simply the variety of results or outcomes that naturally occur in the wake of a behavior.

For example, you step out onto thin ice and fall through.  The consequences of which could be that you get wet, get cold, drown, swim, laugh and have fun, etc. You may be rescued by a stranger -- fall in love, get married, have children, and so on.

The variety of natural outcomes can be all negative, all positive, or a mixture. 

Consequences can be experienced immediately following the behavior (fall through ice - get wet) or be experienced many years later (rescued by stranger - have children).   Smoking cigarettes can have immediate positive consequences (calming) and negative long-term consequences (cancer).

As the responsible adults working to manage behavioral situations, we typically have little or no control over the consequences that occur and no control over how they are perceived by the child.

Punishment is typically what we mean when we say consequences. (see staff training, Counter-Transference)

Punishment is something intentionally constructed and imposed by an authority figure - parent, teacher, referee, coach, principal, judge, etc. - after a negative behavior or infraction that we wish to discourage or suppress – make less frequent or less intense.

A punishment can be either the imposition of something aversive (not-recommended examples of aversive punishments include: hitting, yelling, soap in the mouth, electric shock, pepper spray, etc.) or the removal of something positive, beneficial, pleasurable, or rewarding (examples include no dessert after dinner, no TV, no cell phone).

(Book mark for later: rewards and punishments can be logical or arbitrary. Logical is preferred. Arbitrary is typically counter-productive -- makes the situation worse.)

For example, in hockey, infractions can result in game stoppage, time in the penalty box or possible expulsion from the game, possible loss of control of the puck, and the requirement that the team play short-handed,

None of these are naturally occurring consequences -- they are authority-figure-constructed results that follow an infraction.

The penalty box is a punishment, but it's not an aversive punishment. The time spent in the box is the removal of something pleasurable, enjoyable, positive, beneficial -- playing hockey.

It also requires the team to play short-handed -- a punishment imposed on the team for an individual player infraction. This too is not an aversive punishment. Playing short-handed is the removal of something positive or beneficial -- a full line of players.

Note: a reward is the removal of a punishment or the delivery of a privilege, benefit, positive, etc. I'll discuss this in more detail elsewhere.

Please keep in mind, regardless of whatever an authority figure thinks a constructed punishment might mean, how the child / student / athlete perceives this can be very different:  mixed and / or the exact opposite.

For example, for a student who experiences school as unpleasant, out-of-school suspension can be experienced by the student as wholly rewarding. In which case, the infraction is encouraged, not suppressed.

(More to follow)

Kenneth H. Little, MA / 135 Lee Brook Road / Thornton, NH 03285 / 603-726-1006 / Achieve-ES.com