more that a child is hit by his or her parents, the more likely he or she is to hit siblings, or his or her spouse and children in adulthood. In fact, Straus found that the more parents were corporally punished themselves (as children), the greater the percentage who went beyond ordinary corporal punishment with their own children and engaged in attacks severe enough to be classified as physical abuse. Violence begets violence. The use of corporal punishment on children ensures that the acceptance of violence and pain to control children will be passed down to the next generation. (Straus 121)The physical and psychological health risks of corporal punishment discussed above are just a sample of the vast host of effects that spanking has on children. For example, anxiety disorders, desensitization to violence and a lack of empathy in adulthood for suffering children are some of the other potentially harmful effects of corporal punishment. With such risky implications, a concerned caretaker wouldnt want to take the risks involved in spanking children not even once.If the physical, psychological and social health risks of corporal punishment are so high, then why does the majority of society approve of such a practice? Correcting children using physical force is deeply rooted in human history. The famous religious admonishment of spare the rod, spoil the child continues to saturate the beliefs of many, especially strict religious groups that believe that childrens wills should be broken by submission. Another explanation is that many people dislike admitting that their own parents, in using corporal punishment, did something wrong. It is important to keep in mind that back in the days when harming a childs body to force compliance was instituted, there was no study of child development or child psychology. Yet, in todays sophisticated society that can boast of all its knowledge of child development, we are still employing out-dated, antiq...
