WI corporal punishment retained in US public schools?

Are you kidding? What about those precious, wonderful 'time-outs'? I don't know how it is in the US with the blacks, latinos, etc. but corporal punishment would never be acceptable to whites anymore. [maybe a bit in the south]
Now, I come from a culture where it was and is still the accepted practise, although somewhat less than a generation ago. I was caned often as a child, as were all my friends. I used it on my 2 kids, albeit less than I got it. I know this is a controversial subject, but here we all agree that it was and is effective. we are convinced that it is NOT child abuse when done properly. I know of cases where it was abuse.
Sorry for the rant; I guess I should have just said that for it to still be in use in the US is almost ASB.
 
According to the current psychological studies:

A population that is on average more aggressive and more rebellious; a greater degree of child abuse; children who are, on average, worse-behaved.
 
According to the current psychological studies:

A population that is on average more aggressive and more rebellious; a greater degree of child abuse; children who are, on average, worse-behaved.
Stop with that science stuff--no one believes in science except when can make cool weapons. :)
 
As a formal school teacher I would like to say that the studies finding that corporal punishment does more damage are complete bullshit!!! Most american public schools have become complete disasters because the kids know that they will not face any relevant consequences for bad actions. The current time outs are have NO effect at all, in fact for some incurring the time out type of punishment is a point of honor.
 
According to the current psychological studies:

A population that is on average more aggressive and more rebellious; a greater degree of child abuse; children who are, on average, worse-behaved.

Current psychological studies.

After all, on this very board, someone (I think it was Susano) said genetic evidence proved humans and Neanderthals did not interbreed and now new genetic evidence has shown that they did.

Furthermore, children who are well-behaved might not need to be spanked in the first place. These studies might be confusing correlation with causation.

Furthermore, do the parents of the children getting spanked tie actions with consequences well ("Billy, you're being spanked because...") or are they just frustrated parents lashing out at their kids?

I can understand spanking producing dysfunctional kids if it's the latter case, but not the former.
 
Last edited:
I attended secondary school in Scotland in the seventies when corporal punishment was fairly common.

It helped keep the well behaved pupils in line to some degree.

The poorly behaved pupils actually behaved in a worse manor due to peer pressure claiming they were scared. Unofficial records were kept to see who had the most strokes.

I dare say my american cousins psycology would be the same so I cannot see how behavoir whould be any better with a brutal discipline agenda
 
I attended secondary school in Scotland in the seventies when corporal punishment was fairly common.

It helped keep the well behaved pupils in line to some degree.

The poorly behaved pupils actually behaved in a worse manor due to peer pressure claiming they were scared. Unofficial records were kept to see who had the most strokes.

I dare say my american cousins psycology would be the same so I cannot see how behavoir whould be any better with a brutal discipline agenda

Ah, an actual mechanism to explain how spanking could make kids worse.
 
Current psychological studies.

After all, on this very board, someone (I think it was Susano) said genetic evidence proved humans and Neanderthals did not interbreed and now new genetic evidence has shown that they did.

Furthermore, children who are well-behaved might not need to be spanked in the first place. These studies might be confusing correlation with causation.

Furthermore, do the parents of the children getting spanked tie actions with consequences well ("Billy, you're being spanked because...") or are they just frustrated parents lashing out at their kids?

I can understand spanking producing dysfunctional kids if it's the latter case, but not the former.

Current science is all I can use, I'm afraid. I have surprisingly little access to psychological studies from the future:). Also, I believe the correlation and causation are controlled for.

I'm not an expert on child psychology, you understand, so I'm just going from what casual knowledge I possess.
 
Current science is all I can use, I'm afraid. I have surprisingly little access to psychological studies from the future:). Also, I believe the correlation and causation are controlled for.

I'm not an expert on child psychology, you understand, so I'm just going from what casual knowledge I possess.

Neither am I.

One would hope studies produced by prestigious scientific entities control for correlation and causation--as well as for how corporal punishment is administered, which is more important to my argument than the correlation/casuation one--but the Wikipedia article on the subject states that some of the studies used rather vague definitions as to what constituted violence, corporal punishment, etc.
 
I attended secondary school in Scotland in the seventies when corporal punishment was fairly common.

It helped keep the well behaved pupils in line to some degree.

The poorly behaved pupils actually behaved in a worse manor due to peer pressure claiming they were scared. Unofficial records were kept to see who had the most strokes.

I dare say my american cousins psycology would be the same so I cannot see how behavoir whould be any better with a brutal discipline agenda

Ah that's because that's an example of doing it wrong. Here in Singapore, schools have the option of retaining corporal punishment and as a trainee teacher I taught in a school much like the one you describe where caning just make the boys more defiant and rebellious. They were doing it wrong, just like your school.

You don't use it as a common punishment. If it's commonly dealt out then, as you say, collecting the most strokes turns into a contest of who's got the biggest balls. Caning is your nuclear option and should be used as such. Caning is used to humiliate a student and instill fear in the rest. Caning is your signal that the school authorities no longer cares about rehabilitation in this individual case and simply wishes to extract obedience through pain. It is not pleasant, it's not nice and it's not supposed to be.

Essentially you use caning for the most heinous of crimes, infractions that would receive something just short of expulsion- in cases of expulsion a caning should be administered before expulsion to make sure the (former) student knows that going against authority results in pain.
 

TheCrow__

Banned
Well I foresee alot of problems with this. There would be alot of angry mothers. There would be a way higher drop out rate. And alot more youth springing into gangs.
 

TheCrow__

Banned
Also would a child be more likely to do something if a. you spake him if he does it or b. you give him a cookie when you tell him not to do it? :confused:. I don't know so I'm asking I don't know very much on child psychology.
 
Well I foresee alot of problems with this. There would be alot of angry mothers. There would be a way higher drop out rate. And alot more youth springing into gangs.

I think the only way to retain corporal punishment is certain cultural changes not happening or happening differently. That would take care of the "angry mothers" problem, as they'd be accepting of it too.

About the dropout rate, someone who misbehaves to the point of being paddled to the point it makes a serious difference in their decision to quit school is likely a troublemaker anyway and there'd be a strong overlap between "quitting because of paddling" and "quitting because they're 'too cool for school' or getting expelled for being a punk."

About the gangs, I could imagine provoking a paddling (especially from a teacher who can really put on the pain) could be a gang initiation rite, but why would there be more gangs?

This is why I'm skeptical of a lot of the "corporal punishment makes bad kids" studies is because they don't specify WHY these things happen.
 
Ah that's because that's an example of doing it wrong. Here in Singapore, schools have the option of retaining corporal punishment and as a trainee teacher I taught in a school much like the one you describe where caning just make the boys more defiant and rebellious. They were doing it wrong, just like your school.

You don't use it as a common punishment. If it's commonly dealt out then, as you say, collecting the most strokes turns into a contest of who's got the biggest balls. Caning is your nuclear option and should be used as such. Caning is used to humiliate a student and instill fear in the rest. Caning is your signal that the school authorities no longer cares about rehabilitation in this individual case and simply wishes to extract obedience through pain. It is not pleasant, it's not nice and it's not supposed to be.

Essentially you use caning for the most heinous of crimes, infractions that would receive something just short of expulsion- in cases of expulsion a caning should be administered before expulsion to make sure the (former) student knows that going against authority results in pain.

A very wise post.
 

TheCrow__

Banned
Friends tell me thats sorta the point of gangs.
Yeah I'm not arguing that I'm just saying if you still had corporal punishment in schools I'm sure it would corelate to more youths joining gangs. Because you would definately have a higher drop out rate among those who got punished more often and some who got disciplined few times most likely. These youths could easily be coerced into established gangs of the area or lead to more gangs who may be more violent due to a more violent educational system.
 

TheCrow__

Banned
Oh you don't have to take anything I say serious. I already stated I know quite nothing of child psychology. I'm merely making my inferences upon my knowledge of the subject. So enlighten me please. And your statements on my questions did so. And that was to Prankster forgot to quote.
 
Getting away from what effects corporal punishment has, why was it abolished in the first place?

Hmm...did these studies that show it made things worse first appear during the period the reduction process began (many states still have corporal punishment in their schools, IIRC) and prompt school systems to abolish it?

Perhaps in TTL, rather than abolish corporal punishment entirely, the school systems retain it and use it Singapore-style--as the ultimate (or next to ultimate) sanction for the worst offenders. De facto, this would mean reducing its frequency.
 
Probably because it became "cruel and unusual", along with sensitization of youth over the years. I know in Canada (Quebec in particular) it has received a bad name because in many of the elite private schools, particularly the male ones, corporal punishment sometimes went hand in hand with sexual abuse during the 1960s and 70s.
 
Top