Debate, please help. I will be chosing a best answer fast!?
- Thread starter Rangi
- Start date
Wow, i did this exact debate a couple of weeks ago! except it was that 'parents should NOT be able to smack their children' and I was affirmative 
haha
Okay, well:
Im not sure what the reference to NZ is but I have loads of information from the Affirmatives side for you if you want
I'll copy and paste now
these are things to rebut:
A corrective smack on the bottom from a responsible and loving parent is clearly different from a fist in the face or blow on the chest or back. Anything less than a ban on smacking means many parents will continue to assume that hitting their children is their only option. In fact there are many other ways of disciplining children which are more effective and which teach children self-discipline without hurting them.
Parents should be giving children the right messages about the use of violence. No one wants a child to grow up in a violent society but, inside the very place where they should be safest, parents teach them that hurting someone is the answer to problems.
Parents should be teaching children the difference between right and wrong and helping to reduce the level of violence in society rather than contributing to it.
Smacking children does none of these things.
A number of prosecutions for parental smacking or restraint have been reported over the past year. These have caused great distress to the families involved, especially the children. They have also wasted the time and resources of courts and social services, as well as public money, all of which is urgently needed to help seriously abused children.
Current laws let parents hit children so long as it does not leave a lasting mark. This is wrong because it allows blows to the head and means kids who do not bruise easily can be hit harder. The law should be that nobody has the right to hit children.
Children are protected by law from harsh punishment and violent abuse by parents and others. It is the duty of society as a whole to protect its most vulnerable members from harm. If an adult hits another adult it is considered assault, a crime, and therefore becomes a legal offence of the law. Why then should a full grown adult hitting a small child be considered a 'domestic activity' and not be punishable?
A number of prosecutions for parental smacking or restraint have been reported over the past year. These have caused great distress to the families involved, especially the children. They have also wasted the time and resources of courts and social services, as well as public money, all of which is urgently needed to help seriously abused children.
Current laws let parents hit children so long as it does not leave a lasting mark. This is wrong because it allows blows to the head and means kids who do not bruise easily can be hit harder. The law should be that nobody has the right to hit children.
Children are protected by law from harsh punishment and violent abuse by parents and others. It is the duty of society as a whole to protect its most vulnerable members from harm. If an adult hits another adult it is considered assault, a crime, and therefore becomes a legal offence of the law. Why then should a full grown adult hitting a small child be considered a 'domestic activity' and not be punishable?
If you want anymore then I have some but yeah Thats some of my points on why it's a criminal offence
hahaOkay, well:
Im not sure what the reference to NZ is but I have loads of information from the Affirmatives side for you if you want
I'll copy and paste now
these are things to rebut:
A corrective smack on the bottom from a responsible and loving parent is clearly different from a fist in the face or blow on the chest or back. Anything less than a ban on smacking means many parents will continue to assume that hitting their children is their only option. In fact there are many other ways of disciplining children which are more effective and which teach children self-discipline without hurting them.
Parents should be giving children the right messages about the use of violence. No one wants a child to grow up in a violent society but, inside the very place where they should be safest, parents teach them that hurting someone is the answer to problems.
Parents should be teaching children the difference between right and wrong and helping to reduce the level of violence in society rather than contributing to it.
Smacking children does none of these things.
A number of prosecutions for parental smacking or restraint have been reported over the past year. These have caused great distress to the families involved, especially the children. They have also wasted the time and resources of courts and social services, as well as public money, all of which is urgently needed to help seriously abused children.
Current laws let parents hit children so long as it does not leave a lasting mark. This is wrong because it allows blows to the head and means kids who do not bruise easily can be hit harder. The law should be that nobody has the right to hit children.
Children are protected by law from harsh punishment and violent abuse by parents and others. It is the duty of society as a whole to protect its most vulnerable members from harm. If an adult hits another adult it is considered assault, a crime, and therefore becomes a legal offence of the law. Why then should a full grown adult hitting a small child be considered a 'domestic activity' and not be punishable?
A number of prosecutions for parental smacking or restraint have been reported over the past year. These have caused great distress to the families involved, especially the children. They have also wasted the time and resources of courts and social services, as well as public money, all of which is urgently needed to help seriously abused children.
Current laws let parents hit children so long as it does not leave a lasting mark. This is wrong because it allows blows to the head and means kids who do not bruise easily can be hit harder. The law should be that nobody has the right to hit children.
Children are protected by law from harsh punishment and violent abuse by parents and others. It is the duty of society as a whole to protect its most vulnerable members from harm. If an adult hits another adult it is considered assault, a crime, and therefore becomes a legal offence of the law. Why then should a full grown adult hitting a small child be considered a 'domestic activity' and not be punishable?
If you want anymore then I have some but yeah
Thats some of my points on why it's a criminal offence
M
Megaz
Guest
They're gunna talk about the recent cases of shild beatings resulting in death, but you can say that this is murder, and not good parental correction. They don't do this to correct their child's actions, they do it for fun/ or plain abuse. Beating a child is illegal NOW, so is murder, so how would this law stop them, when they're already breakign a current law.
They'll say something about giving children a voice or a chance to speak out, but you can say that if children are being beaten, they are proably too scared to report it anyway.
They'll say something about giving children a voice or a chance to speak out, but you can say that if children are being beaten, they are proably too scared to report it anyway.
SuperflyCaroline
New member
Beating your kids is fine. Choking them is where I start to draw the line
sunflowerpinwheel
New member
if you are against then read this article from CNN:
Spanking detrimental to children, study says
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Study: Spanking at age 1 predicts aggressive behavior problems at age 2
Spanking also linked to lower scores on a mental development test at age 3
Experts say parents should explore other methods of disciplining children
Spanking reinforces negative memories in the child's mind
updated 12:25 p.m. EDT, Wed September 16, 2009
By Elizabeth Landau
CNN
(CNN) -- Think a little spanking won't do much harm to kids? New research says the effects can be long-lasting.
Children are too young to understand when parenting behavior is wrong, a social psychologist says.
Experts say "popping" kids can do more harm than good. A new study of more than 2,500 toddlers from low-income families found that spanking may have detrimental effects on behavior and mental development.
"We're talking about infants and toddlers, and I think that just, cognitively, they just don't understand enough about right or wrong or punishment to benefit from being spanked," said Lisa Berlin, the study's lead author and research scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University.
Berlin and colleagues found that children who were spanked as 1-year-olds tended to behave more aggressively at age 2, and did not perform as well as other children on a test measuring thinking skills at age 3. The study is published in the journal Child Development.
Although these effects were somewhat small, the study is just the latest of many supporting psychologists' advice against spanking. Still, some experts say spanking has a time and place.
The new study focused on children from low-income families because prior research suggested that spanking is more common among them, Berlin said. This may be because of the added stresses of parenting in a low-income situation, or because of a "cultural contagion" of behaviors among people. For example, in some families this study examined, a grandmother would spank a child, or neighbors would encourage physical discipline, she said.
Her study found that about one-third of the 1-year-olds, and about half of the 2- and 3-year-olds, had been spanked in the previous week, according to mothers' self-reporting to the researchers. At all three ages, African-American children were spanked significantly more frequently than those from white and Mexican-American families, and verbally punished more than the other children at ages 2 and 3, the study said.
Previous research had also found that parents who spank are more likely to be younger, less educated, single, and/or depressed and stressed, Berlin's study said. Spanking is most commonly used among parents who were spanked themselves, who live in the South, and/or who identify themselves as conservative Christians. These parents also tend to believe in the effectiveness of spanking or believe the child is at fault in a given situation, the study said.
The new research refutes the idea that more aggressive children are more likely to be spanked, Berlin said. On the other hand, the study did find that children who were fussier at age 1 were more likely to be spanked and verbally punished, she said.
Verbal punishment did not appear to have the same detrimental effects as spanking in this study, Berlin said.
Some remain unconvinced that parents should never spank their children. Robert Larzelere, associate professor of human development and family science at Oklahoma State University, conducted a meta-analysis of 26 studies on the subject, and found that, overall, spanking seemed more effective than 10 of 13 alternative disciplinary methods for getting a child to behave or do as asked.
Much of the research on the subject does not clearly demonstrate a causal link, Larzelere said. For example, in comparing studies, children who are spanked and children who are taken to psychologists both are more likely to have aggressive behavior later, he said.
The best use of spanking, Larzelere said, is in children between the ages of 2 and 6 when milder discipline tactics, such as time out, fail.
"That's why psychologists trained parents to use spanking that way for 25 years [from the] late '60s to mid-'90s," he said. Now, the trend of advice is away from spanking, but there's not much hard evidence to support it, he said.
Berlin's study focused on particularly early ages, Larzelere noted; much of the spanking literature focuses on ages 2 and older. Twelve months is probably too early to spank children, but there's no established point between ages 1 and 2 at which it is appropriate, he said.
Others say parents should not resort to spanking at any age. Susan Newman, social psychologist and author of "Little Things Long Remembered: Making Your Children Feel Special Every Day," said parents should discourage bad behaviors by taking away privileges such as dessert, or setting an earlier bedtime. They should a
Spanking detrimental to children, study says
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Study: Spanking at age 1 predicts aggressive behavior problems at age 2
Spanking also linked to lower scores on a mental development test at age 3
Experts say parents should explore other methods of disciplining children
Spanking reinforces negative memories in the child's mind
updated 12:25 p.m. EDT, Wed September 16, 2009
By Elizabeth Landau
CNN
(CNN) -- Think a little spanking won't do much harm to kids? New research says the effects can be long-lasting.
Children are too young to understand when parenting behavior is wrong, a social psychologist says.
Experts say "popping" kids can do more harm than good. A new study of more than 2,500 toddlers from low-income families found that spanking may have detrimental effects on behavior and mental development.
"We're talking about infants and toddlers, and I think that just, cognitively, they just don't understand enough about right or wrong or punishment to benefit from being spanked," said Lisa Berlin, the study's lead author and research scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University.
Berlin and colleagues found that children who were spanked as 1-year-olds tended to behave more aggressively at age 2, and did not perform as well as other children on a test measuring thinking skills at age 3. The study is published in the journal Child Development.
Although these effects were somewhat small, the study is just the latest of many supporting psychologists' advice against spanking. Still, some experts say spanking has a time and place.
The new study focused on children from low-income families because prior research suggested that spanking is more common among them, Berlin said. This may be because of the added stresses of parenting in a low-income situation, or because of a "cultural contagion" of behaviors among people. For example, in some families this study examined, a grandmother would spank a child, or neighbors would encourage physical discipline, she said.
Her study found that about one-third of the 1-year-olds, and about half of the 2- and 3-year-olds, had been spanked in the previous week, according to mothers' self-reporting to the researchers. At all three ages, African-American children were spanked significantly more frequently than those from white and Mexican-American families, and verbally punished more than the other children at ages 2 and 3, the study said.
Previous research had also found that parents who spank are more likely to be younger, less educated, single, and/or depressed and stressed, Berlin's study said. Spanking is most commonly used among parents who were spanked themselves, who live in the South, and/or who identify themselves as conservative Christians. These parents also tend to believe in the effectiveness of spanking or believe the child is at fault in a given situation, the study said.
The new research refutes the idea that more aggressive children are more likely to be spanked, Berlin said. On the other hand, the study did find that children who were fussier at age 1 were more likely to be spanked and verbally punished, she said.
Verbal punishment did not appear to have the same detrimental effects as spanking in this study, Berlin said.
Some remain unconvinced that parents should never spank their children. Robert Larzelere, associate professor of human development and family science at Oklahoma State University, conducted a meta-analysis of 26 studies on the subject, and found that, overall, spanking seemed more effective than 10 of 13 alternative disciplinary methods for getting a child to behave or do as asked.
Much of the research on the subject does not clearly demonstrate a causal link, Larzelere said. For example, in comparing studies, children who are spanked and children who are taken to psychologists both are more likely to have aggressive behavior later, he said.
The best use of spanking, Larzelere said, is in children between the ages of 2 and 6 when milder discipline tactics, such as time out, fail.
"That's why psychologists trained parents to use spanking that way for 25 years [from the] late '60s to mid-'90s," he said. Now, the trend of advice is away from spanking, but there's not much hard evidence to support it, he said.
Berlin's study focused on particularly early ages, Larzelere noted; much of the spanking literature focuses on ages 2 and older. Twelve months is probably too early to spank children, but there's no established point between ages 1 and 2 at which it is appropriate, he said.
Others say parents should not resort to spanking at any age. Susan Newman, social psychologist and author of "Little Things Long Remembered: Making Your Children Feel Special Every Day," said parents should discourage bad behaviors by taking away privileges such as dessert, or setting an earlier bedtime. They should a
sunflowerpinwheel
New member
if you are against then read this article from CNN:
Spanking detrimental to children, study says
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Study: Spanking at age 1 predicts aggressive behavior problems at age 2
Spanking also linked to lower scores on a mental development test at age 3
Experts say parents should explore other methods of disciplining children
Spanking reinforces negative memories in the child's mind
updated 12:25 p.m. EDT, Wed September 16, 2009
By Elizabeth Landau
CNN
(CNN) -- Think a little spanking won't do much harm to kids? New research says the effects can be long-lasting.
Children are too young to understand when parenting behavior is wrong, a social psychologist says.
Experts say "popping" kids can do more harm than good. A new study of more than 2,500 toddlers from low-income families found that spanking may have detrimental effects on behavior and mental development.
"We're talking about infants and toddlers, and I think that just, cognitively, they just don't understand enough about right or wrong or punishment to benefit from being spanked," said Lisa Berlin, the study's lead author and research scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University.
Berlin and colleagues found that children who were spanked as 1-year-olds tended to behave more aggressively at age 2, and did not perform as well as other children on a test measuring thinking skills at age 3. The study is published in the journal Child Development.
Although these effects were somewhat small, the study is just the latest of many supporting psychologists' advice against spanking. Still, some experts say spanking has a time and place.
The new study focused on children from low-income families because prior research suggested that spanking is more common among them, Berlin said. This may be because of the added stresses of parenting in a low-income situation, or because of a "cultural contagion" of behaviors among people. For example, in some families this study examined, a grandmother would spank a child, or neighbors would encourage physical discipline, she said.
Her study found that about one-third of the 1-year-olds, and about half of the 2- and 3-year-olds, had been spanked in the previous week, according to mothers' self-reporting to the researchers. At all three ages, African-American children were spanked significantly more frequently than those from white and Mexican-American families, and verbally punished more than the other children at ages 2 and 3, the study said.
Previous research had also found that parents who spank are more likely to be younger, less educated, single, and/or depressed and stressed, Berlin's study said. Spanking is most commonly used among parents who were spanked themselves, who live in the South, and/or who identify themselves as conservative Christians. These parents also tend to believe in the effectiveness of spanking or believe the child is at fault in a given situation, the study said.
The new research refutes the idea that more aggressive children are more likely to be spanked, Berlin said. On the other hand, the study did find that children who were fussier at age 1 were more likely to be spanked and verbally punished, she said.
Verbal punishment did not appear to have the same detrimental effects as spanking in this study, Berlin said.
Some remain unconvinced that parents should never spank their children. Robert Larzelere, associate professor of human development and family science at Oklahoma State University, conducted a meta-analysis of 26 studies on the subject, and found that, overall, spanking seemed more effective than 10 of 13 alternative disciplinary methods for getting a child to behave or do as asked.
Much of the research on the subject does not clearly demonstrate a causal link, Larzelere said. For example, in comparing studies, children who are spanked and children who are taken to psychologists both are more likely to have aggressive behavior later, he said.
The best use of spanking, Larzelere said, is in children between the ages of 2 and 6 when milder discipline tactics, such as time out, fail.
"That's why psychologists trained parents to use spanking that way for 25 years [from the] late '60s to mid-'90s," he said. Now, the trend of advice is away from spanking, but there's not much hard evidence to support it, he said.
Berlin's study focused on particularly early ages, Larzelere noted; much of the spanking literature focuses on ages 2 and older. Twelve months is probably too early to spank children, but there's no established point between ages 1 and 2 at which it is appropriate, he said.
Others say parents should not resort to spanking at any age. Susan Newman, social psychologist and author of "Little Things Long Remembered: Making Your Children Feel Special Every Day," said parents should discourage bad behaviors by taking away privileges such as dessert, or setting an earlier bedtime. They should a
Spanking detrimental to children, study says
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Study: Spanking at age 1 predicts aggressive behavior problems at age 2
Spanking also linked to lower scores on a mental development test at age 3
Experts say parents should explore other methods of disciplining children
Spanking reinforces negative memories in the child's mind
updated 12:25 p.m. EDT, Wed September 16, 2009
By Elizabeth Landau
CNN
(CNN) -- Think a little spanking won't do much harm to kids? New research says the effects can be long-lasting.
Children are too young to understand when parenting behavior is wrong, a social psychologist says.
Experts say "popping" kids can do more harm than good. A new study of more than 2,500 toddlers from low-income families found that spanking may have detrimental effects on behavior and mental development.
"We're talking about infants and toddlers, and I think that just, cognitively, they just don't understand enough about right or wrong or punishment to benefit from being spanked," said Lisa Berlin, the study's lead author and research scientist at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University.
Berlin and colleagues found that children who were spanked as 1-year-olds tended to behave more aggressively at age 2, and did not perform as well as other children on a test measuring thinking skills at age 3. The study is published in the journal Child Development.
Although these effects were somewhat small, the study is just the latest of many supporting psychologists' advice against spanking. Still, some experts say spanking has a time and place.
The new study focused on children from low-income families because prior research suggested that spanking is more common among them, Berlin said. This may be because of the added stresses of parenting in a low-income situation, or because of a "cultural contagion" of behaviors among people. For example, in some families this study examined, a grandmother would spank a child, or neighbors would encourage physical discipline, she said.
Her study found that about one-third of the 1-year-olds, and about half of the 2- and 3-year-olds, had been spanked in the previous week, according to mothers' self-reporting to the researchers. At all three ages, African-American children were spanked significantly more frequently than those from white and Mexican-American families, and verbally punished more than the other children at ages 2 and 3, the study said.
Previous research had also found that parents who spank are more likely to be younger, less educated, single, and/or depressed and stressed, Berlin's study said. Spanking is most commonly used among parents who were spanked themselves, who live in the South, and/or who identify themselves as conservative Christians. These parents also tend to believe in the effectiveness of spanking or believe the child is at fault in a given situation, the study said.
The new research refutes the idea that more aggressive children are more likely to be spanked, Berlin said. On the other hand, the study did find that children who were fussier at age 1 were more likely to be spanked and verbally punished, she said.
Verbal punishment did not appear to have the same detrimental effects as spanking in this study, Berlin said.
Some remain unconvinced that parents should never spank their children. Robert Larzelere, associate professor of human development and family science at Oklahoma State University, conducted a meta-analysis of 26 studies on the subject, and found that, overall, spanking seemed more effective than 10 of 13 alternative disciplinary methods for getting a child to behave or do as asked.
Much of the research on the subject does not clearly demonstrate a causal link, Larzelere said. For example, in comparing studies, children who are spanked and children who are taken to psychologists both are more likely to have aggressive behavior later, he said.
The best use of spanking, Larzelere said, is in children between the ages of 2 and 6 when milder discipline tactics, such as time out, fail.
"That's why psychologists trained parents to use spanking that way for 25 years [from the] late '60s to mid-'90s," he said. Now, the trend of advice is away from spanking, but there's not much hard evidence to support it, he said.
Berlin's study focused on particularly early ages, Larzelere noted; much of the spanking literature focuses on ages 2 and older. Twelve months is probably too early to spank children, but there's no established point between ages 1 and 2 at which it is appropriate, he said.
Others say parents should not resort to spanking at any age. Susan Newman, social psychologist and author of "Little Things Long Remembered: Making Your Children Feel Special Every Day," said parents should discourage bad behaviors by taking away privileges such as dessert, or setting an earlier bedtime. They should a
So long as it is just a 'smack' then I think it should be allowed. The problem is in defining a 'smack'. Some adults could 'smack' hard enough to injure a child while others use a' tap' All that is needed is enough to teach the child to remember being corrected and not a broken bone..
So long as it is just a 'smack' then I think it should be allowed. The problem is in defining a 'smack'. Some adults could 'smack' hard enough to injure a child while others use a' tap' All that is needed is enough to teach the child to remember being corrected and not a broken bone..