'First Child'

‘First Child’

In his column in the Columbian last week, Leonard Pitts talked about spanking, and I think it’s worth presenting his ideas, as I agree with him. I’m quoting from the conclusion of his editorial:

“I don’t believe in spanking reflexively. Not every offense merits it. Indeed, most don’t.

I don’t believe in spanking to excess. The idea is to sting, not hurt.

I don’t believe in spanking in anger. Anger leads to loss of control.

And no, I don’t believe all spanking is abuse. A 2001 study by Dr. Diana Baumrind – a psychologist who opposes spanking – found that mild to moderate corporal punishment causes no lasting harm.

Here’s what I do believe. A parent must be loving, accessible, involved, but also an authority figure, the one who sets limits, and imposes real and painful consequences for kids who flout them

Otherwise, you risk sending into the world something we already have in excess – children poisoned by “self-esteem,” walking in serene self-entitlement, convinced the sun shines for them alone. Such children are invariably brought up short. The universe is a rough teacher and its lessons sting worse than any spanking you could get. The worst thing you can do is send your offspring into that classroom unprepared.

Speaking of child abuse.”

Scroll to top