ravensheart18 said:
b3nn3tt said:
artanis_neravar said:
b3nn3tt said:
ravensheart18 said:
JoJoDeathunter said:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/5/e1057
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1983895,00.html
I do think frequency is an issue. The US pediatric association (may not be the exact title) saying not to spank because it becomes less effective with greater use. The study you just pointed at sees a problem in a group with 2+ spankings a week.
I think if spankings are constant they probably are less effective, or even counter effective. However if you get spanked once a year, that probably will make you wake up and realize you did something REALLY bad that time, unlike anything else you've done.
I'm not too sure where the line in the sand is... and I suspect it would be a hard one to prove scientifically. Also I suspect not all kids will react the same way to the same punishment methods.
On the causation vs corrolation, my brother had REAL emotional and mental problems. This caused him to act out more all his life. Over time he got hit more than I did because he did more crap. His mental condition was a medical one, no matter what our parents did he would have been a trouble maker. Hitting him more probably didn't help, but if you were just corrolating # of spankings vs behavior, you'd see him looking worse than me, but the issue stemmed from the behavior, not the spankings. (And I can say that with certainty because my parents were "modern" parents that never spanked either of us until we were probably 8-10 and tried to use all the mind tricks to keep us in line - my brother was ALWAYS worse)