Spank To Get Attention -- What Is Your Family Rule About Spanking? Do You Believe Spankings Ever Are The Right Punishment? If So How Are They Administered And At What Point In The Disciplining Process Do You Use Them. If You Don't Spank, What Do You Do To Make Your Point?

In the last six months or so, I have been asked a disproportionate number of questions on spanking, the central theme of these inquiries always being: Is spanking a form of child abuse?

There is, I discovered, an activist movement within the professional community which is lobbying to criminalize spanking, "a la Sweden." Advocates of such legislation, speaking in terms of "children's rights," claim children should be accorded the same protections against "physical assault" as adults. Opponents talk of "parents' rights" and "family values." Some, claiming that spankings are "scriptural," assert that anti-spanking laws would violate the separation of church and state.

But is "to spank or not to spank?" even the proper question? To explore this controversy, I've decided upon the format of a self-interview. The first question is predictable:

Q: John, do you believe in spanking children?

A: I've always thought that was a strange question, as if spanking is some sort of religious principle. Without doubt, there are some who would have parents believe that by spanking children on a regular basis, they are pleasing God and doing His (this is definitely a guy-God) will, but I am not one of those.

Speaking for myself, spanking has never been a religious experience. I do not believe that one spoils the child by sparing the rod, or switch, or belt, or hand. But, true confession time, I have, on occasion, spanked my children. When they were much younger, that is (they're both adults). And if I had it all to do over, given the same situations and outrageous behaviors, I would probably do so again. I have no regrets. But I don't believe in spanking. I do not believe that spankings are necessary to the proper rearing of children. Nor do I believe that spankings are, in and of themselves, abusive.

Q: So, you think spanking can be a valid form of discipline?

A: No, Spankings are a lousy form of discipline. In fact, they do not warrant being classed as discipline at all. At best, a spanking is nothing more, nothing less, than a dramatic form of nonverbal communication (and anyone who's ever lived with a child can attest to the occasional need for drama). It's one means of getting the attention of a child who needs to give that attention quickly; of terminating a behavior that is rapidly escalating out of control; of putting an exclamation point in front of a message the child needs to hear.

The spontaneously delivered (as in: without warning) spank to the child's rear end says "Stop!" and "Now hear this!" Having terminated the behavior in question (a tantrum, for example), having secured the child's attention, it is necessary that the parent follow through with a consequence of one sort or another. The spank is merely the prelude to the consequence. In the final analysis, the spank is, therefore, inconsequential. The discipline is in the follow-through. Without proper follow-through a spanking is, at the very least, stupid.

Q: What kinds of consequences might be appropriate?

A: The parent might send the child to his/her room for a time, or take away a privilege for the remainder of the day, or simply give the child a stern reprimand. For the most part, and for the purposes of our discussion, the form the consequence takes is fairly arbitrary. All-important is that the spanking not be the consequence, the end in itself. When spankings are treated as an end in and of themselves, parents misuse, over-use, and edge ever closer to abuse. No doubt about it, spankings can be, and often are, administered abusively.

Q: Since there's no way of knowing who will abuse and who will not, wouldn't anti-spanking laws eliminate the risk to children?

A: If the contention is that spanking should be made illegal because some parents administer them abusively, then where do we draw the legislative line? Banishing a child to his/her room can be done abusively. It is abusive, for instance, to lock a child's door and keep the child in confinement for days. And one can reprimand a child about his/her misbehavior abusively. It would, for example, be abusive to refer to the child as a "little sh--." But sending children to their rooms and reprimanding them are not, in and of themselves, abusive. Nor are spankings. But they can be.

Q: What is, in your estimation, a properly administered spanking?

A: I believe in spanking as a first resort; of spanking in anger; of spanking only with one's hand; of spanking only the child's rear end; of administering no more than two spanks at a time. I also believe the more often one spanks, the less effective the spankings will be at securing the child's attention. In order to retain their effectiveness, parents must spank only once in the proverbial blue moon.

Q: Spank as a first resort? In anger?

A: That's right. Spontaneously. As soon as you see that the child is losing control or as soon as the child commits whatever completely outrageous act (i.e. spitting on an adult). Whack! "Now hear this!" Send the child to his room. Done. As one builds up to a spanking with warning and threat, one builds frustration. When under those "last resort" circumstances, the spanking finally comes, it's likely to consist of whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack. That's when spankings become abusive.

And yes, in anger. If you're going to spank a child's rear end, it is rightful to make perfectly clear you disapprove of the child's behavior. You are displeased, as in angry. Not in a rage, however. You're not in a rage because you've spanked as a first resort. You're just angry, and you're able to communicate that emotion clearly.

Add the hand only, not belts, switches, whatever. Add to the child's rear end only, not thighs, face, arms. Add once, maybe twice. Add the message and the consequence, the follow-through, and you're got a properly administered spanking. But, again, I don't believe in spanking. They can, used wisely, accomplish something. But they are not necessary. Nor are they necessarily abusive.