Domestic violence: causes, impacts, and intervention strategies

¶ … Parental Discipline Methods in Public Places

In the past, the biblical imprecation to "spare the rod, spoil the child" (Proverbs 13:24) has been replaced by a more enlightened view of discipline and corporal punishment is becoming increasingly rare. To determine the current state of affairs in this area, this paper provides a record of empirical observations of the discipline methods used on children by parents in public places, including a shopping mall, a park and an amusement park. An analysis of the frequency of physical punishments to discipline children and in what situations is followed by an assessment concerning the effects of differing locations, situations and social classes of the parents influenced their public behavior. Finally, a summary of the research and important findings concerning the discipline methods used by parents in public places are provided in the conclusion.

Review and Analysis

Disorderliness and misbehaviors in children have been a major concern of parents throughout history (Hassan & Titilayo, 2012). Disruptive or rowdy behaviors or lack of self-control in children can result in delinquent behaviors later in life, so providing appropriate discipline for children is an important part of the social development (Hassan & Titalayo, 2012). Some studies, though, have identified a correlation between corporal punishments such as spanking and antisocial behaviors later in life (Ewald, 2004). According to Hassan and Titilayo, "In the past, parents, teachers and school administrators employed many traditional discipline programs to control the behaviour of children. Some of these programs include the use of brute force, such as spanking or hitting with an object like a cane" (p. 134). When these methods proved ineffective, the typical response was to increase the frequency and intensity of the physical punishments (Hassan & Titilayo, 2012). By very sharp contrast, popular views about physical punishment have changed in dramatic ways in recent years. As Martingale (2009) points out, "Personally, I think it's a funny, funny parent who pulls down their child's knickers to smack their bottom, either in private or in public. It is a punishment with undercurrents of public humiliation and the smacker's assertion of power rather than the control of unruly behavior" (p. 11). Likewise, Ewald (2004) emphasizes that, "Corporal punishment as a means of discipline has been entrenched in U.S. culture since Colonial times [but] attitudes have evolved over the years" (p. 11).

A number of communities in the United States have even outlawed spanking in recent years, and more than a dozen countries have implemented policies that condemn corporal punishment, including Sweden (the first to do so), Germany, Israel, and Denmark (Ewald, 2004). The recent changes in the public's attitude concerning corporal punishment is also due in part to the increase in popular psychology and the focus on children's individuality (Ewald, 2004). The research to date, though, remains inconclusive as to whether striking a child physically is a violation of human rights or a legitimate method for discipline young people that may not understand reasoning or other, less drastic, punishment methods (Ewald, 2004). In fact, many parental advocacy groups support spanking as an indispensable part of "optimal child raising" (Ewald, 2004, p. 11).

To determine current parental punishment practices in public places, this researcher visited a large shopping mall's food court, a municipal park and an amusement park as places known to attract families with children. A summary of the empirical observations made at each of these three locations is provided in Table 1 and depicted graphically in Figure 1 below.

Table 1

Type, frequency and social classes of parental punishments used in public places

Location

Type of Punishment

Frequency of Application

Perceived Social Class of Parents*

Shopping mall

Spanking

2

1. Upper middle class

2. Middle class

Verbal reprimand

5

1. Three upper middle class

2. One middle class

3. One lower middle class

Withholding of requests

3

1. Two middle class

2. One lower middle class