BD, it would be interesting to see if any research has been done on the willingness to use physical violence against others from those who have been smacked as children and those who have not (Note, I'm not talking about those who've been beaten relentlessly).

Part of the argument against smacking is the idea that it teaches the use of violence to solve problems. Is that case proved? What is the reverse is true and children who are never smacked are more likely to use violence?

It's also interesteing to see how much more interest this thread has attracted than the thread on tools for discipline. If people are really serious about reducing the use of smacking then that thread should have overflowed with ideas and strategies for discipline.

R0bert

RObert,

I think at heart most of us on OLO love a bit of controversy: the longest threads always seem to be the ones where there are at least two opposing camps debating back and forth. But some of the shorter threads are the most sensible and useful as far as ideas go.

Personally, I love going head to head with posters I disagree with, provided we can keep the argument civilized and respectful. I reckon after a while you learn who these ones are (BOAZ and Martin come to mind) and who is likely to get upset and abusive or who you're just going to go round in circles with. A sense of humour helps, as does not being too thin skinned.

I find OLO is a great way of honing my thinking and testing my beliefs, and often learning something new (or at least learning about other ways of looking at an issue).

Cheers,

Rob
yes... it would be a most difficult study to see if there is any connection between 'childhood smacking experiences' and 'propensity to use violence as an adult to solve conflict' (with other adults)

I feel that the propensity to use violence goes WAY beyond smacks administered in love during the terrible twos. The other robert has mentioned that psychological cruelty is potentially for more dangerous in this connection.

We are all capable of 'violence', but I feel fairly confident that a grown up who has been told continuously they are worthless, no-good, without hope and stupid, is more likely to resort to violence against others than one who was suitably build up as a person by parents.
I think the smacking kind of fades into insignificance.

Most importantly though, I challenge the assumption that smacking teaches children to solve conflict with violence. Because the issue is usually about doing 'right and wrong' For example, if a child is aggressive towards his little brother who is playing with the childs toy, and he starts whacking his little brother.. a parental smack is quite appropriate along with the message about how wrong that is.

Now, you might be tempted to draw the conclusion "That its just one form of violence used to solve another", but the message the child receives is "If I'm violent to my brother, I'll feel it myself" which is a good deterrent. In fact it teaches "Violence begets violence" which should teach them 'Don't be violent' :)

I would attribute adult view of solving disputes with violence much more to what happens during teenage years than the terrible twos. In that regard, I could definitely see a connection.

Snout.. 'amen' :)