"We need to decide now –
person by person, family by family, church by church,
community by community, state by state, nation by nation –
to embrace non-violent methods of discipline
which can begin to reshape our lives, our consciousness, and our world,
and to alter the course of our future
and the future of generations yet to come."
-Philip Greven, 'Spare the Child' Knopf, 1991
In doing some research related to corporal punishment, it turns out that this is quite a controversial issue. There have been studies to show that hitting children for disciplinary purposes does little or no harm and others that reflect permanent damage. However, even though there may not be a clear-cut conclusion, perhaps the bottom line question is why would anyone be so adamant about having the right to hit children? Do they really think that spanking is a necessary form of discipline? Or could it be that it is simply the swiftest.
Alternative methods of punishment, such as time-out or grounding , may be more time-consuming but it seems much more life-giving to calmly explain why a behavior is unacceptable and administer a punishment as a consequence of the action, rather than hitting a child possibly in a fit of anger.
Whether or not there is conclusive proof that corporal punishment is harmful, why risk the possibility of damaging our children and teaching them that physical aggression is the way to take care of unacceptable actions? As Greven suggests in the opening quotation, let us embrace non-violent methods of discipline for the sake of our children and future generations yet to come.
person by person, family by family, church by church,
community by community, state by state, nation by nation –
to embrace non-violent methods of discipline
which can begin to reshape our lives, our consciousness, and our world,
and to alter the course of our future
and the future of generations yet to come."
-Philip Greven, 'Spare the Child' Knopf, 1991
In doing some research related to corporal punishment, it turns out that this is quite a controversial issue. There have been studies to show that hitting children for disciplinary purposes does little or no harm and others that reflect permanent damage. However, even though there may not be a clear-cut conclusion, perhaps the bottom line question is why would anyone be so adamant about having the right to hit children? Do they really think that spanking is a necessary form of discipline? Or could it be that it is simply the swiftest.
Alternative methods of punishment, such as time-out or grounding , may be more time-consuming but it seems much more life-giving to calmly explain why a behavior is unacceptable and administer a punishment as a consequence of the action, rather than hitting a child possibly in a fit of anger.
Whether or not there is conclusive proof that corporal punishment is harmful, why risk the possibility of damaging our children and teaching them that physical aggression is the way to take care of unacceptable actions? As Greven suggests in the opening quotation, let us embrace non-violent methods of discipline for the sake of our children and future generations yet to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment