social work

 In the U.S., parents are allowed to use corporal punishment

 In 21 states in the U.S., teachers are allowed to use corporal punishment

 In 24 countries, corporal punishment is prohibited in all settings.

 Significant decrease in CP  Mid 1960s – most children “smacked”  1970’s – less than 50% of children “smacked”  1980’s – around 1/3rd of children  After 2000, “a few percent”  The proportion of reported assaults that are

prosecuted has not increased  Despite fears to the contrary, rates of youth

involvement in crime, alcohol and drug use, raped and suicide decreased

 According to federal statistics, during the 2002-03 school year, more than 300,000 school children were disciplined with CP.

 70% were in five Southern states: TX, MS, TN, AL, AR

 A 2002 ABC News telephone poll of over 1,000 adults, 65% approved of spanking and 72% thought teachers should not be allowed to spank children.

 www.endcorporalpunishment.org

 The rates of corporal punishments in the U.S are high: over 90% of parents report using some type of physical discipline

 Preschoolers and school-age children are at highest risk for corporal punishment; rates in younger children are also substantial (10% to 15% of children)

 A 1995 survey found that 49% of parents admitted to disciplining their child by hitting them with an object other than on the buttocks, kicking or beating them, and threatening them with a gun (www.endcorporalpunishment).

 Corporal punishment regulations and attitudes: - Children are one of the only members of the U.S. society that are not fully protected against corporal punishment (unlike women, prisoners, etc.) - Most states do not allow corporal punishment at schools or child care settings; however, parental corporal punishment is permitted - The belief in parental autonomy, and considering parents to be “owners” of children prevents establishing clear laws against the use of physical discipline

 Almost 1,000 phone interviews with parents all over the U.S.

 Sample:  81% EZ, 12%AA, 7% other  52% married  College educated parents overrepresented (34%

vs. 23% in Census  Parents with less than high school education

underrepresented (8% vs. 14%)

 CP defined as slapping, spanking, pinching, shaking (ages 3+), hitting on the buttocks with a belt or paddle.

 Overall percentages of parents using CP during the previous year were:  35% for infants and up to 94% for 3 to 4 year olds.  Over 50% used CP with 12 year olds  One-third used CP with 14 year olds and

approximately 20% with 16 and 17 year olds

 The more often parents used CP, the more likely children would later exhibit behavior problems (e.g., aggression, anger, depression, poor school performance)

 10% of parents of a one-year-old reported shaking their child, which could lead to “Shaken Baby Syndrome”

 Boys hit more than girls  Mothers used CP more than fathers  The relationship between CP and SES was negative

 70% of AA parents used CP as compared to 60% of EA parents  No difference in chronicity

 CP used more in the South than the North  Chronicity of CP did not vary by SES  Limitations:  Self-report of frequency of CP in the past year

 Corporal punishment defined as “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.”

 Large scale meta-analysis of 88 studies  Found “strong associations” between CP and

11 child behaviors and experiences

 Immediate compliance – CP stops children from misbehaving immediately

 Decreased moral internalization – children were less likely to internalize moral norms and social rules; decrease in long-term compliance

 Increased aggression, especially in boys  Increased delinquent and antisocial behaviors  Decreased quality of relationship between parent

and child  Decreased child mental health

 Increased adult aggression  Increased adult criminal and antisocial

behavior  Decreased adult mental health  Increased risk of now adult abusing own child

or spouse  Strongest associations with immediate

compliance and physical abuse

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPFz2n1Qt7I *UNC finds link between spanking and PA

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPES67rRjrU &NR=1

*how spanking feels, according to children

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPADltNd- _o

*corporal punishment in school

 Corporal punishment increases immediate compliance, enables the parent to feel empowered and to fulfill the expectation that his/ her child will obey

 However, it also decreases the quality of the parent-child relationship and increases the risk of physical abuse

 Increased delinquency and heightened aggression especially in boys

 Decrease in moral internalization

 CP produces a decrease in child’s and in adult’s (when victims become adults) mental health

 CP produces an increase in adult aggression  CP produces also an increase in adult criminal

and antisocial behavior  CP produces an increased risk of abusing the

victim’s own child or spouse  Overall agreement in the field is that aside from

increased compliance, there is no other positive gain in the use of corporal punishment

 Do behavioral problems lead to CP or vice-versa or is there another variable causing both? (Correlation or Causation?)

 CP may have different effects depending on the child’s temperament, age, gender (e.g. there seems to be a stronger relationship between CP and aggression in middle-school children – why? Also for boys rather than girls – why?

 Impact on adult (victim) behavior may be intersected by many other intervening variables

 Child’s behavior is aggressive or threatened to one’s own or other’s safety

 Parents think that the child understood the rules and can act appropriately (when parents feel the child has made a deliberate decision to disobey)

 Parents are upset and make negative attributions regarding the children

 Short-term socialization goals (e.g. I want my child not to cross the street; or I want my child to learn to defecate on the toilet)

 With preschoolers  With boys

 Parents who use CP tend to be younger  Mostly used by mothers than fathers  Parents may be aggressive or have antisocial

traits and behaviors  Parents may be depressed  Parents also tend to use other negative

techniques (e.g. yelling)

 Does the child see CP as normative and beneficial?

 Social support decreases depression and stress, and therefore decreases CP

 Low SES linked to CP: is this spillover of stress, or related to context that requires conformity and obedience

 Religion, geographic region

 CP endorsement not related to SES  Meaning of CP:

- African American families endure more environmental adversities

- The cost of disobedience may be more serious - The goal is to help children better self-control

rather than external control being an end in itself

Warmth and demandingness dimensions are independent; demandingness (not necessarily CP) may reduce impact of dangers in urban, minority environments, but may not be helpful in less risky environments

. Question of association between CP and emotional abuse, especially in white families.

 Do you think CP is implemented in the same manner in white and African-American families?

 What is actually said during CP is crucially important! It may be that message coming from African-American parents may include verbal explanations and explicit reconciliation

 Cultural acceptance may mean children see it as legitimate  CP is linked to aggression for EA children but not for AA

children  In AA families, CP is more likely the result of the child’s

behavior problems whereas in EA families there seems to be a reciprocal relationship

 Research on racial differences is extremely limited

 Many professional organizations openly discourage the use of corporal punishment and encourage other disciplinary practices: - The National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners - The American Academy of Pediatrics - The National Association of Social Workers - The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry - The United Methodist Church

 Despite widespread agreement on the harmful effects of corporal punishment, legislative actions did not follow suit

 Canada: corporal punishment of children younger than 2 and older than 12 is banned; use of objects, blows or slaps to the head are not permitted

 24 countries in Europe and around the world ban any use of corporal punishment (e.g. Sweden, Cyprus, Romania, New Zealand)

 In most countries the ban is educational: no criminal penalties; rather, public education efforts and support for parents

 Research suggests that such legislation tends to be effective, and results in reduction in the rates of corporal punishment

 Many parents are not aware of alternative discipline strategies; may believe that corporal punishment is the only option

 Parents strongly believe that spanking “works”. Research shows: - Short-term effectiveness (discontinuation of behavior) - Long-term harmful consequences

 Effective alternative strategies may include behavioral techniques: - Positive reinforcement of prosocial behaviors - Removal of privileges and time-out as forms of punishment - These techniques require greater time and effort on the part of the parents to be successful

 The use of corporal punishment does not promote meaningful learning on the part of the child: - Children focus on “being better”, rather than understanding what the parents are trying to teach them - Children may learn that “violence is Ok” and use it in their lives: at school, with siblings and friends, with future partners and children - Children’s own aggressive behaviors may escalate, followed by increased punishment on the part of the parents (sometimes resulting in abuse)

 Possible intervention strategies to reduce corporal punishment: - Media campaigns - Educating parents on the harmful effects of corporal punishment, as well as on alternative discipline strategies - Providing parents with assistance to participate in parent- training programs (help with child care, transportation, etc.) - Attention to cultural competence - Educating professionals (teachers, religious leaders, health care providers) to address the issue of corporal punishment with parents

 Corporal punishment in South Korea:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOAAUS1A5pA