Is spanking actually bad for kids, or do kids of stupid violent parents merely inherit (genetically) violent and stupid tendencies?
Are there any double blind randomized controlled twin studies on this or is it all correlational bullshit?
Are you saying that inclination to resolving issues with violence isn't in part attributable to genetics?
Why would it be more prevalent now if it were so?
And this faggot:
>Gershoff reports that Straus and Stewart (1999) found that 94% of American parents spank their children by the ages of 3 or 4.
claims it's still very prevalent, despite the shift in cultural attitude toward hitting children.
>Why do retards on /sci/ think genetics accounts for everything
Actually the other possibility is that kids who don't need to be spanked are less aggressive and more intelligent, thus not needing to be spanked as they can be more easily reasoned with or whatever.
Not him but yes.
Genetics controls hormone levels, neurotransmitter regulation, brain structure, fucking everything. Fuck up a person's hormones enough and all the environmental influence in the world won't do shit. Remember that we're just physical objects, and our genes basically determine how we get built.
>Fuck up a person's hormones enough and all the environmental influence in the world won't do shit
Please specify which hormones you're talking about.
Epinephrine, testosterone and oestrogen spring to mind.
If you can show me a parenting style that will counter the effects of either of the above I would be extraordinarily surprised.
>double blind randomized controlled
would be impossible to get past an ethics committee / IRB
would be hilariously underpowered (type ii error)
>or all correlational bullshit
you cannot simply dismissing any study that is not an RCT as "correlational bullshit". There is an entire field called epidemiology which is dedicated to the proper design of observational studies that are used to infer causation.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends against the use of physical punishment as a form of child discipline. There is a large body of evidence that supports this. You can either start here http://www.aafp.org/afp/1998/0915/p1001.html , or ask your family doctor or pediatrician.
There's literally no evidence in here, it's just a statement.
>you cannot simply dismissing any study that is not an RCT as "correlational bullshit".
It's a pretty weak form of evidence, and should not be relied upon as a primary source of data.
>There is a large body of evidence that supports this.
Remember the phrase:
>the plural of anecdote is not data
Spanking can't be done alone or in anger, it doesn't teach the child what they had done is wrong.
If you're going to spank the child, they need to understand why they're being spanked. Like if your kid nearly gets hit by a truck because they were being a dumb fuck on the road, then you should spank them just to let them know that if the truck hit him, they would've got a lot more than a spanking from the truck.
lol it's pretty clear to me that you don't know what a "primary source" actually is.
>>There is a large body of evidence that supports this.
>Remember the phrase:
>the plural of anecdote is not data
Did you hear this from your high school statistics teacher, and think repeating this makes you sound smart?
We are talking about a large body of scientific evidence here, not "anecdotes". Here is the AAP's position paper: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/723 .
Since it's obvious that you don't understand why I am referring you to this paper, I will give you a hint: scroll down to the references and you can find over 30 papers of accumulated data
Spanking kids is bad coz the fucking policeman comes and puts daddy in jail for a night and he cant see the kids he loves for a week until all the police and social service reports are in.
Then comes a full year of fucking monitoring...
Oh, and little fucking jonny got slapped upside the gead twice because he and his 3 12 year old schoolfriends was treating his 5 year old kid sister like a dog and making her lick their boots. (Just so you know).
I don't care whether it's good for the child or not. If I wasted 9 months of my career only to give birth to this little dipshit, then he better be perfect or I'll beat the shit out of him.
>>Does not spanking work?
Yes, clearly. Has no negative effect at all. Glad we all stopped spanking. Hurray.
>I think we both know that's just not the case friend.
Pre-emptively backing my claim:
The story goes that those who are spanked are more aggressive and violent. The people pictured, the general demographic they belong to, are hardly well known for their aggression and physical violence. Most of those people have probably never fought in their lives.
Not all people who get abused are violent. Some people who were hurt a lot as a child are actually heavily opposed to violence. I'd say physical discipline can teach the young not to bully others or think too highly of themselves but will probably cause emotional instability and depression.
Indeed. Anyway I'd really want to see some control for inherited temper issues/low intellect. The notion that low-IQ, violent people are more likely to spank their kids who are themselves liable to be low-IQ and violent themselves seems to me at least as plausible as the notion that spanking makes people more violent and less intelligent.
My wife was spanked a lot as a child and now she gets off on it, I was only ever threatened with it but now I get off on spanking others. What dose this prove? Not a damn thing.