Corporal punishment has been a part of family life for thousands of years, taking its place in societies all over the globe. From wood switches to thick leather belts, all sorts of tools have been used to discipline naughty children. No one has ever really examined the question of whether or not this form of punishment is productive or counterproductive. In examining the situation of whether or not this form of punishment is warranted or even what one might consider proper, a sample situation must be examined. Lets say, for arguments sake that a little boy named Johnny just threw a temper tantrum and threw his bowl of Coco Crispies all over the kitchen floor. Now there are two things his mother could do at this point to correct him. She could either use corporal punishment, taking its form in nearly abusive words or a few backhands across his face, or she could simply have a talk with him and explain why his behavior was wrong and why he should not do it again. Now which one would accomplish more? Obviously, simply talking to little Johnny would accomplish more. Not only would he know that what he did was wrong, but also he would know not to do it again. Now if she had spanked him or taken harsh words with him, she would be the lesser for it. He would be left with no reason for why his action was wrong, and he would resent his mother and possibly end up with some emotional damage since his mother gave him no reasoning behind her actions. He would see his mother as an abusive parent, which would lead him to fear his mother for years to come, dissolving any possibility of them ever developing a normal mother-son relationship. This is just one fictional example that probably takes form in some way or another in the homes of millions of families. It is more than a question of whether or not to hit a child; it is a question of whether or not it benefits the child. Harsh words and/or a physical punishment do not adequately c...
