Probably the biggest disagreement over parenting that my husband and I have had is about spanking.

Both my husband and I were given “corporal punishment” as kids, although I have to say that my dad only halfheartedly hauled me on his lap and delivered a few sharp hits.  My husband’s father, however, I think perhaps used his belt a bit too liberally.   My husband and all three of his brothers were subjected to being hit with a belt whenever one of them wouldn’t admit wrongdoing, and it happened quite a bit.

Having a son, my husband has insisted since he was born that being hit was one of the best ways to make a boy get the picture, and quick.  I have always resisted this line of thinking, and we’ve gotten into more than one argument about whether our son should be spanked.  I, in my infinite wisdom and possibly threatening to have him sleep on the couch, have prevailed. 

And it seems it’s a good thing I did, because this article from CNN showcases a recent study about how children who were spanked as toddlers tended to be more aggressive than their peers, as well as some cognitive slowness as compared to their peers at age 3.

The article is also interesting how it points out the tendency for physical punishment in lower-income/less educated families, to which my husband, the first (and so far only) person in his family to obtain a college degree, belongs.  Whereas both of my parents were educated, and eventually phased out physical punishment altogether, even though it was in vogue as a parenting technique at the time.

But really, I don’t care about the studies, they aren’t really what makes me against spanking.  I just believe that hitting someone much younger and much more vulnerable than you is wrong.  That being a parent is to definitely provide discipline, but delivering it in such a violent way inevitably violates the trust a child has in their parents.

What do you think?