The contention that a good spanking never did anyone any harm is wrong, as the preponderance of psychological literature shows. Despite James Dobson's (1970) Dare to Discipline, a work which dared parents to discipline their children into more respectful and self-disciplined behavior, hitting children has not been recommended by most psychologists as a strategy for disciplining children. The dangers of accidental injury to children, the links with child abuse, the possibility of future psychosexual ramifications, and the fact that corporal punishment just doesn't work, are among the reasons cited for not spanking children.
On the other hand, Dobson (1970) argues against "extreme permissiveness," and proceeds to make a connection between it and the absence of physical coercion. Dobson's (1970) views will be examined as an alternative to more generally accepted views from the scientific literature. Finally, techniques from the field of behavioral psychology will be offered as alternatives to spanking, or other forms of physical coercion.
In Children Are People Too: The Case Against Physical Punishment, Newell (1989) asserts, "There is an injustice and illogicality in suggesting that it is acceptable to hit children, but that it is quite unacceptable for them to hit others, or for adults to hit anyone else. Hitting people is wrong--and children are people too" (p. 12). Thus begins Newell's (1989) logical and ethical argument against physical coercion. His argument is logically and ethically sound because he recognizes the following: (1) the child will model the behavior of hitting; that is to say, he or she will repeat the behavior of hitting because of seeing it acted out; (2) the child will develop anxieties as a result of waiting to be spanked; it is this sense of impending doom (which transfers to other situations) which is to be avoided; (3) the child may come to positively associate being punished with personal...