Question: Should corporal punishment be used in schools?

Title: Corporal Punishment in schools Content: Accepted.Corporal punishment should be used in schools.Corporal punishment is defined as:"Physical punishment" http://www.google.ca...;

Title: should schools use corporal punishment Content: Before I start this debate, I want to define the topic. First of all corporal. Punishment and schools a place where children get their education. So if you define the topic, it'll come out like this. Should places where they give children education use punishments. I think that we should use this corporal punishment. Corporal punishment has been use for a long time and nothing bad happened.

Title: Corporal punishment in schools. Content: Seeing as my opponent has forfeited. , failed to follow he rules of the debate, and has not defended his case. I will urge a con ballot. I have followed the rules of the debate, I have argued every round, I have defended my own case, and I have attacked my opponents case, I believe that corporal punishment should not be implemented in schools.

Title: Corporal punishment in schools. Content: round 2 speaker 1 (me): present argument/case round 2 speaker 2 (you): present argument/case NO REBUTTING IN THIS ROUND YOU MAY NOT ATTACK MY CASE IN ANY WAY YOU MAY ONLY PRESENT YOUR CASE. round 3 speaker 1: attack your case round 3 speaker 2: attack only case not my rebuttal. round 4 speaker 1: attack/defend rebuttal round 4 speaker 2: attack/defend rebuttal round 5 speaker 1 : conclusion round 5 speaker 2: conclusion I do not believe corporal punishment should be implemented in schools. Please always state sources. if you run out of space you may post them in the comments with a note on the formal statement that you are doing so.

Title: Corporal punishment in schools. Content: Thank you for the debate. I will offer an opinion on corporal punishment in school which supports its us

Title: Corporal punsihment for children Content: This debate will be more about how corporal punishment works at schools and why it is incorrect, rather than at home. How can children know the difference between right and wrong, and how can teacher ensure and establish order in class as well as an appropiate environment for learning. My opponent will start this debate with his arguments. Than you for accepting this debate and Happy Holidays!!

Title: should schools use corporal punishment Content: I will begin my side by saying corporal punishment is highly unnecessary, and doesn't do anything besides implant more negative behavior. Also since you didn't specify what type of education, I must assume all grade levels(excluding college), and thus we will debate on that. First off, corporal punishment is a unnecessary act, and the schools have no right to hit a kid without consent of parents. Also since you never specified whether school had the parent consent. You have so many more punishments such as : Detention, sat. detention, in school suspension, suspension, and expulsion. I don't see why you need to enter the fist of "justice" into the picture. Secondly, striking the child isn't going to solve anything, all it is going to do is embarrass the child, and cause possible physcological problems. Also if the child is in high school and gets hit, then he or she may strike back. Also the allowing of corporal punishment in school leads to child abuse. What stops a teacher for beating the kid, or a student beating a teacher back in self defense. Thirdly, violence does not belong in the classroom. It does not help the education, and in fact probably harms it. The child will be more afraid of the teacher, they won't pay attention to the lesson plan. Also most associations are against corporal punishment, the one that caught my eye was The American School Counsellor Association. Hmmm, counsellors against the beating of children, didn't see that coming. If the people who are suppose to watch and help guide our children oppose why should it be used?

Title: Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Content: I am going to go pro on this on, but not all the way. Let me explain, I believe that some slight forms of corporal punishment should be allowed, but not to the extent that you are talking about in your argument. In schools, children do not learn as much when they are being disrupted by other classmates. If a classmate is being a distraction, the others don't learn. If there are some very mild forms of punishment like a slap on the rust with a ruler or some other form of mild physical punishment, the student will be more likely to stop and quit being a distraction at other times. If physical punishment is only used as a last resort, being punished will become a thing that students (especially young students) not want. If a student knows they will only be lectured, they will be less likely to stop behaving that way than if they were lectured and mildly punished physically. When a student wants attention, sometimes they act out to get it. If they gen punished corporeally they wont resort to acting out in school to get the attention that they yearn. Also if it is used less often, and more conservatively, the student will not be psychologically harmed in the process.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment can make a valuable example of a student

Title: If teachers and parents weren’t allowed to hit children, they would discipline them in better ways. Content: The general standard of student behaviour and test results in many schools has declined since the state banned corporal punishments. Many teachers (in Britain) believe that is because corporal punishment was an efficient way of dealing with misbehaving students. Corporal punishment should be an option available to teachers – but not the only option and not one to be used all the time. A ban on corporal punishment would simply takes away from teachers a very effective disciplining method.

Title: The Reintroduction of Corporal Punishment Into Schools Content: Hello all. This debate is on whether or not corporal punishment should be reintroduced into the education system, to be used by teachers and school administrators. I will be arguing in the negative, and my opponent will argue as a proponent of the reintroduction of corporal punishment into the school system.Definitionscorporal punishment: a form of physical punishment that involves the deliberate infliction of pain in order to punish a person convicted of a crime or as retribution for a perceived offence, including physical chastisement such as spanking, paddling or caning of minors by parents, guardians, or school or other officials.school: an institution for educating children. For the purposes of this debate, we will assume that this policy will apply to all of these institutions, not just ones under the jurisdiction of the state.FormatR1: AcceptanceR2: All Main Arguments and ContentionsR3: RebuttalR4: Response and Summary of Previous Rounds/ConclusionPlease note that this debate will be conducted in a formal, respectable manner with extended and well-developed arguments. Each debater will be allowed 8,000 characters to formulate a statement for each round.-----------------------I await my opponent's acceptance.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment is a good tool for disciplining unruly children

Title: Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Content: It should be aloud in school so children will have better discipline and pay attention more. Studies show that since corporal punishment was banned discipline in children has gone dramatically down.

Title: Corporal punsihment for children Content: "Pro says that corporal punishment is quick and effective, but it's not." There are exceptions sure but exceptions don't count. " Kids start to feel bad and there is a point when some decide that they will not take that anymore and rebel or start to react negatively which prove that in long term cases it does not work effectively." This is a common or in other words a commonly heard case when children are abused. There is no evidence of this in schools when corporal punishment is applied nor in average families, instead this practice is held due to its quick and effective nature. "Aldo the other oart may go into depression because when they get hit or spanked they feel worse than when you talk to them and explain them what they did wrong and why it is wrong." Same objection as above. " Well you can discipline your students without using corporal punishment, for example, in school today they don't use corporal punishment and kids turn out okay." As I have pointed out, under the spoiled section theres a link where we read that society is becoming more and more violent. Extra Arguments: 1." Even in school when beating is uses the kids lose respect for the adult who is inducing the beating, also they lose self-respect and they start act mischievously" Both statements are unheard of when corporal punishment is moderated. 2. "They learn that it is not wrong to use force in human interactions." Elaborate. 3. "Kids also make many visits to the hospital for nerve damage or even broken bones." I proposed controlled corporal punishment and not battering.

Title: Corporal punishment Content: School and home corporal punishment(example spanking) on children should be banned. I will let my opponent present his/her arguments first or to simply accept and then me present my arguments.

Title: Corporal punishment should be banned from schools Content: http://abcnews.go.com... This article shows the ineffectiveness of corporal punishment in schools. In closing, corporal punishment should be banned because it is ineffective and lowers students' IQ's. Other forms of punishment should be explored and tested. Good luck.

Title: Corporal punsihment for children Content: Sorry for forfeiting but I was stuck without Internet for about one week because there were some malfunctions without the connection. Pro says that corporal punishment is quick and effective, but it's not. Kids start to feel bad and there is a point when some decide that they will not take that anymore and rebel or start to react negatively which prove that in long term cases it does not work effectively. Aldo the other oart may go into depression because when they get hit or spanked they feel worse than when you talk to them and explain them what they did wrong and why it is wrong. Pro also states that undisciplined kids may Become tyrants. Well you can discipline your students without using corporal punishment, for example, in school today they don't use corporal punishment and kids turn out okay. EXTRA ARGUMENTS: 1. Even in school when beating is uses the kids lose respect for the adult who is inducing the beating, also they lose self-respect and they start act mischievously. 2. They learn that it is not wrong to use force in human interactions. 3. Kids also make many visits to the hospital for nerve damage or even broken bones.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment helps protect teachers and adults

Title: it works! Content: Corporal punishment is the most effective way of maintaining school discipline and dealing with juvenile crime. I went to an inner city co-educational primary school in an industrial area during the late 1950s/early 1960s. Academic standards were high. Between 30% and 35% of its pupils passed the 11+ and went to grammar school. Discipline was strict. The headmistress caned or slippered boys and girls on the bottom. Corporal punishment was used for minor infringements of rules, for deliberate defiance and to prevent prosecution for criminal offences. It was more of a deterrent for girls than it was for boys who were always challenging authority and getting into mischief. I and three other boys received “six of the best” for disrupting lessons and refusing to do homework. Not wanting to be caned again, we settled down, worked hard and passed the 11+. The school's major disciplinary problems were caused by ten and eleven year old C stream pupils who lived on a new council housing estate At the beginning of the autumn term, the boys organised playground protection rackets. Some carried flick knives or knuckledusters given to them by elder brothers who had been in prison or borstal. One teacher was attacked with a broken bottle. Although uninjured, he had a nervous breakdown and was away from school for two terms. Girls had jam and marmalade rubbed into their hair. Both boys and girls had their clothes slashed with flick knives. Classrooms were vandalised and on two occasions boys were caught setting fire to coats in the cloakroom. At the time children as young as seven could be prosecuted and sent to approved school. The head was put under great pressure by the staff and the local authority to involve the police in these incidents but she always refused. Unlike many head teachers, she accepted responsibility for her pupils’ behaviour out of school hours. Most weekends she was called to the police station to deal with girls caught shoplifting and boys arrested for assault or vandalism. Often the only way she could persuade the victim to withdraw the charges was to agree to cane the delinquents and the punishments were carried out at school with parental consent. Using corporal punishment efficiently and effectively, she kept the members of the school’s criminal fraternity out of the justice system giving them a chance to escape from their back grounds and make something of their lives. One boy who was caned for vandalism obtained a degree in engineering. Another who had been whacked for rubbing marmalade into a girl’s hair went to university and graduated with a degree in economics. Because Dr. Phil is such an expert I guess his expertise is wiser than our ancestors and our elders who have effectively used corporal punishment to discipline their children- our parents and grandparents even. If we were to listen to them they would tell us that corporal punishment is not for everybody because some children can be settled with a reprimand and disapproving look. That being said, they would still rely on the expediency of the cane because all some of these bad kids need is a good spanking.

Title: Corporal punsihment for children Content: O Observations My opponents title: 1."Corporal punsihment for children" Has the word punishment misspelled. 2.We will be focusing on corporal punishment in schools "This debate will be more about how corporal punishment works at schools". I am free to assume that there's no corporal punishment outside of school and vice versa. 3.I can begin in round one "My opponent will start this debate with his arguments" O Burden of Proof Is equal. O Definitions Corporal Punishment: "physical punishment, as spanking, inflicted on a child by an adult in authority." Dictionary.com Child: "a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl: books for children." Dictionary.com O Notes Interestingly my opponent said "Corporal punsihment for children". That's right we're talking about punishment for children and not against them. One must realize that corporal punishment and child abuse are two different things .One acts as an attention getter in a controlled atmosphere, while the other is used intentionally to harm the child in a physical manner. My opponent may not under any circumstances say what kind of corporal punishment I support. In this debate you have mentioned no specifics hence I get to add my own details. O Arguments 1. Quick and Effective Corporal punishment is quick and effective. I don't think that this can be argued. 2. Being Spoiled Undisciplined children are in danger of becoming tyrants. Todays society is a good example: http://www.leaderu.com... 3. Parents We can argue until the bears take over this site but ultimately its our parents choice: " Many school districts also offer parents an opportunity to state whether or not they wish corporal punishment to be used on their sons and daughters. Typically, the parents fill out a form which is filed in the school office. In many districts this is an "opt-out" system. In others an "opt-in" system applies, whereby no student is so punished without explicit parental consent." http://en.wikipedia.org... Thank you

Title: Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools Content: Pro begins his argument by listing the supposed "pros" of corporal punishment. 1) Yes it can be argued that corporal punishment teaches kids discipline but I think that the reasons why it teaches discipline is appalling. Corporal punishment teaches kids to be disciplined out of nothing else but fear. There is no real or valid motive for a child to be disciplined as a result of corporal punishment apart from fear of physical pain. This is in effect isn't teaching children genuine discipline or the importance of discipline. Here are some other proven to work alternatives of disciplining students other than physical abuse (. http://www.webmd.com...). Why would corporal punishment need to be enforced as a means of discipline when there are plenty of other means. Not to mention the sheer problems associated with corporal punishment mentioned in my round 2 arguments. 2) You have no sources to back up the claim that corporal punishment actually deters bad behaviour. This article argues that corporal punishment doesn't deter bad behavior. (. http://getreadyforcollege.wordpress.com...) several case studies show that by repeated physical tortures children usually become even more adamant and might also start hating their elders as they do not understand the reason that why doing certain things are intolerable. On the other hand, disciplining without hitting would mean to first make the child understand that why certain behavior is acceptable and some are not. Teach the child some basic rules of the society and why are they to be followed. It has often been found that by giving logical reasoning to your child's answers, they can be stop many wrong deeds. This is also educating the child about conduct instead of making the child fear constantly. Here is a case study on both the negative physical and mental effects of corporal punishment:(. http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org...) 3) I'm not sure how "no suspensions" is such a pro of corporal punishment. Firstly students can still get suspended if corporal punishment exists in their school but surely suspension is more beneficial to a child than corporal punishment. Suspension 1)Removes a problematic student from school. 2)Provides temporary relief to frustrated school personnel. 3)Raises parental attention to their child's misconduct. It does all these things without the physical and physocological effects of corporal punishment. 4) Also I don't see how corporal punishment limits the amount of educational disruptions. Taking the time to give out corporal punishment in whatever form is much more of a disruption than telling a student to be quiet for example. Again there are many other effective means of punishment other than having to resort to physical violence, which as I have shown, has a great amount of disadvantages. Pro tries to argue that there are restrictions to corporal punishment e. g male teachers not being permitted to use this punishment on female students, however I do not see this as a valid argument. There may be restrictions to corporal punishment but this isn't really making a case on your stance that it should be enforced in school. I would like to state that The United States is the only nation in the western world which still permits corporal punishment in its schools. And even having said that, corporal punishment is banned in schools in 31 states. Statistics show that corporal punishment is on a decline. (. http://www.corpun.com...) This is another point for my case. There is obviously a reason for this decline. People are coming to their senses are realizing that the disadvantages of corporal punish enormously outweigh whatever advantages there might be, which I feel I have shown I look forward to the final round.

Title: Many students who misbehave in school come from unstable families Content: Teachers can be trusted to use corporal punishment as an option. They will think about what to do on a case-by-case basis and try to understand why a child is behaving a certain way. Then, if they think it is appropriate and it would help, they may choose to physically punish the student. Sometimes students who misbehave come from families who are too soft on them and do not discipline them enough, so their teachers need to take the task of setting boundaries. For this type of students, corporal punishment may be very helpful.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment should be limited, but not abandoned

Title: Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Content: No becuase it's just another form of bullying and bullying is wrong so if Corporal Punishment is used it makes things worse for a bullied child

Title: corporal punishment Content: Should corporal punishment be be banned or kept in schools, daycares, etc? I am a student and I think that with the way children/teens act in today's society they need to be disciplined in some way shape or form. Give me your opinions, should we bring it back or not? If we have more punishment in schools and daycares just think how much more respect kids would give their parents. I think it should be brought back, and kept .

Title: Corporal Punishment be Brought Back to Schools Content: Before I start, let me just say this much: I'm against corporal punishment, this is just for fun since we just did this debate at school. Corporal punishment is when a teacher punishes a student physically for a mistake, and it needs to be brought back to schools. It is true that it has been misused in the past, but with new rules, corporal punishment would be a new and healthy part of a student's life. In this case, the ruler shall not be used, or any other tool used to strike the student, including the hand of a teacher. Instead, the punishment will be carried out in the form of running. Depending on the severity of the student's mistake and his/her physical status, the student will be required to run a certain distance. By doing this, it will not only ensure the student will not be abused by a teacher, and it is also good physical excersize. According to http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au..., running will help build strong bones, strengthen muscles, improve cardiovascular fitness. burn plenty of kilojoules. and help maintain a healthy weight. This way, not only is the student punished, it also helps maintain a student's good health. This form of punishment will also avoid missing classtime, which is a problem caused by detention or suspension. The running will be done before or after school, therefore no classtime will be missed, allowing the student to learn everything he/she is supposed to learn. It also costs no money to use this form of punishment. It is efficent both time and money wise. Therefore, corporal punishment should be brought back to schools in the form of running.

Title: Corporal Punishment Is Wrong Content: I will make my rebuttals to Round 2 here in Round 3.1. Corporal Punishment sets clear boundaries and motivates children to behave in school. Con adds to this by stating if the child is aware that they will be given corporal punishment, they will be more aware and prevent further bad actions/behaviors. Punishing the child for these behaviors, though it may be tempting, is not the way to go since it gives the impression that having the emotions in the first place is a bad thing. Klein suggests that rather than scolding a child for acting out, "Helping a child understand their negative emotion (anger, sadness) and in time learn to understand why they feel as they do will help them develop competence socially and emotionally. So, empathizing with a child, rather than scolding them, while setting a limit (i. e. , "I understand you are angry, but I can't let you hit. ") bears better outcomes later than scolding and punishing the young child. " Rather than "shutting down" a child's emotions, help your child see that you understand his frustration and it's OK to feel that way -- but that there's a better way to express it. [1]Con continues adding by stating that corporal punishment is not told clearly enough to the child, resulting misbehaviors. While this is true in some cases, parents are more likely to scold and give them other punishments, other than corporal punishment. Groundings, lectures, limits, etc. are a few examples of parent's different options to punish their child, other than corporal punishment.2. Corporal punishment is quick. Con takes this the school punishment way, by stating that other forms of punishment such as detention or suspension in schools can hurt the student because they can miss school and waste time. Sure, maybe while they are serving their punishments. .. but have you forgotten that the students will be then given all of the homework AND lessons when they come back to school? Teachers are not required but are heavily recommended to evaluate what they have learned. They can even have times before or after school so that the child can be privately taught what they have missed and must know. Therefore, resulting in the child gaining back their miss knowledge during detentions or suspensions. Therefore, non-corporal punishments are not a waste of time and can teach their child a lesson. It would only be a waste of time if the school gives detentions or suspensions for absurd reasons, which seems to be increasing over the years.3. A study shows that kids who have corporal punishment misbehave less. While my own arguments in Round 2 refute this claim, I must add something that this argument has made me remembered. Corporal punishment is child abuse and can cause trauma. In some cases—depending on the number of reports made, the severity of the abuse, and the available community resources—children may be separated from their parents and grow up in group homes or foster care situations, where further abuse can happen either at the hands of other abused children who are simply perpetuating a familiar patterns or the foster parents themselves. In 2004, 517,000 children were living in foster homes, and in 2005, a fifth of reported child abuse victims was taken out of their homes after child maltreatment investigations. [2] Sometimes, children do go back to their parents after being taken away, but these statistics are slim. It's easy to imagine that foster care and group home situations, while they may ease the incidence of abuse in a child's life, can lead to further types of alienation and trauma. For children that have suffered from abuse, it can be complex getting to the root of childhood trauma in order to alleviate later symptoms as adults. The question is, how does child abuse turn into Post Traumatic Stress Disorder later in life? What are the circumstances that cause this to happen in some cases and not others? [3] Therefore, the reason those have corporal punishment misbehave less is that of damaged family relationships and trauma. 4. Young children learn the dangers if you give them the pain of those dangers. The child will only learn the true way of those dangers if they experience it. If the child almost dies, why in any way would you want to hurt your child because they legitimately almost died? If you love them that much, you should be more or so having a heart attack than actually hurting your own child so they understand the pain of those dangers. It's best to keep them fully safe than experience any pain at all. It may cause trauma as well, they can be incredibly scared of those situations and can be bad if adults can do it themselves, not children.5. As corporal punishment decreased in schools, misbehavior has not decreased. I will not be refuting this argument fully if you do not show the proof (or the FULL link to the source) of where you find the proof. Those are my rebuttals for Round 3. I take the floor to Con.

Title: Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools Content: I will now present my argument as defined. Arguments Against Corporal Punishment being enforced in school. 1). The more "spankings children" experience, the greater the chance that they will become aggressive and engage in other anti-social behavior. Source: (Study reported in Archives of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, August 1997 by Murray A. Straus, David B. Sugarman, and Jean Giles-Sims) 2). Poor children, minorities and children with disabilities are hit more regularly in schools, sometimes at 2-5 times the rate of other children. Source: (U. S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, Surveys from 1976-2003, Center for Effective Discipline. ) 3). Corporal punishment teaches children that violence is a way to solve problems. Research shows that this is indeed the message that kids receive whether it's inflicting, receiving or witnessing . Source: (Eron, Walder & Lefkowitz, 1971; Hyman & Snook, 1999; Lahey, Moffit & Caspi, 2003, Reid, Patterson & Snyder, 2002. ) 4). Studies have shown that corporal punishment of children is related to decreased morality, increased aggression, more antisocial behavior, increased criminality, decreased mental health outcomes, increased adult abusive behaviors, and increased risk of being victimized by abusive relationships in adulthood. Source: (Meta-Analysis of 88 corporal punishment studies (Gershoff, E. T. 2002). ) 5). Some statistics here: 78% of corporal punishment states achieved below the national average at the fourth grade level in reading. 75% of the corporal punishment states achieved below the national average in eighth grade level reading (Center for Effective Discipline, year: 2004). Sixty-seven percent of Ohio corporal punishment schools fell in the lowest 25% of schools on state school report cards in the 99-00 school year (Center for Effective Discipline, year: 2001). 6). Injuries often occur e. g bruises, broken bones. Children's deaths have occurred in the U. S. due to school corporal punishment. (hearing before the Juvenile Justice Committee on the Judiciary, U. S. Senate. October 17, 1984) 7). Corporal punishment enforces physical aggression as an acceptable and good means of getting rid of unwanted behavior in our society. (Position paper opposing school corporal punishment by the Society for Adolescent Medicine (Greydanus, DE. et al, 2003). ) 8). More school shooting deaths were found in states allowing school corporal punishment than those who do not. (D. Arcus, 2002. ) 9). There is evidence that harsh physical punishments are damaging to children, emotionally as well as physically. (Mohr, WK and Anderson, J. A. 2002. ) Facts: 10). Schools are the only institutions in America in which striking another person is legally sanctioned. It is not allowed in prisons, in the military or in mental hospitals. 11). Many alternatives to corporal punishment have proven their worth. Alternatives teach children to be self-disciplined rather than cooperative only because of fear. (No source here, just kind of general knowledge). These are the main reasons why I believe that corporal punishment should not be enforced in schools. I look forward to the next round. Further online source: (. http://www.neverhitachild.org...)

Title: All schools should bring back corporal punishment Content: As my opponent had posted an argument in round one, albeit a cursory one, I did the same. May I suggest for future debates that my opponent state that round one is for acceptance and avoid making an argument in round one.School shootings are obviously largely an American phenomenon. My opponent is going to have a hard time linking them to bans on school corporal punishment, for two simple reasons. One is that school corporal punishment has been banned in many countries, where school shootings are either very rare or have not even occurred at all.[1] The other reason is that there are nineteen US states where school corporal punishment has not been banned at all.[2][3][4]I am amused that my opponent has used a debate as a source. Not only is it a secondary source, it provides rebuttals for me of any points he gleans from it.Via my opponent's own source, in defence of corporal punishment:In a survey completed by the Times Educational supplement, 6000 teachers were questioned. One in five believed that class room behaviour had deteriorated since the abolition of corporal punishment and they believed the education system would improve with the re-introduction of corporal punishment.[5][6] Shrewd observers will have worked out that the large majority, four in five, believed that class room behaviour had not deteriorated and that education would not improve with the reintroduction of corporal punishment!I suggest the minority of teachers are the ones whose methods of discipline are ineffective and need more training at the very least.In the US, the National Association of Secondary School Principals has expressed its opposition to corporal punishment in schools.[7]Via my opponent's source, we can see that if there is any correlation between corporal punishment and crime, it is that use of corporal punishment coincides with crime. Of the states with the ten highest murder rates in the United States, educators paddle children in eight of them.Of the states with the ten lowest murder rates in the US, educators paddle children in one of them.Of the ten states with the highest percentage of the population in prison, educators paddle children in nine of them.Of the ten states with the lowest percentage of the population in prison, educators do not paddle children in any of them.[8]Crime in the UK (which is what my opponent is referring to with his 67% increase) has been rising since 1918. Plainly banning corporal punishment is not the reason for an upwards trend. Corporal punishment was actually banned in 1986.[9][10][11] There would then be a delay until children reached typical criminal age. Citing the crime increase since 1981 doesn't tell you anything useful.Part of the reason crime statistics have risen sharply is an increase in the reporting of crime. The British Crime Survey showed that the number of crimes was far higher in 1981 than that recorded by the police. There were three times as many thefts, twelve times as much vandalism, three times as many sexual offences, nine times as many robberies, and twice as many burglaries as the official statistics recorded.[12]"Children"s behaviour has been adversely affected by the rights culture we have in Britain"Assertion not backed by evidence.My opponent claims that corporal punishment would be effective against bullying. Is my opponent claiming that bullying is a recent phenomenon, and does not actually occur in places which still have corporal punishment?My opponent claims that corporal punishment "worked for 7000 years." What does my opponent mean by "worked"? Does he want to hold up 5000 B.C as a glowing standard? Surely all my opponent can mean by "worked" is that the human race continued to exist. Anyhow, tradition is no reason to continue a practice. We can imagine a man in Mexico arguing for the reintroduction of human sacrifice on the basis that it was an honourable tradition.Violence committed by adults on defenceless children is not defensible. If an adult assaults an adult in this manner it is criminal. Guards are not permitted to paddle prisoners. Why is this seen as an acceptable way of disciplining children? If we cannot treat adults in this way, if to do so is abuse, why do some think children should be so dealt with? Also, what lesson can children possibly learn from corporal punishment, except might makes right?My opponent has failed to engage with the scientific literature that says corporal punishment achieves the opposite to its aims. If they cannot do so, everything else is moot. The debate is over. I'll add a couple of more sources for my opponent to engage with.Research indicates that corporal punishment may adversely affect a student's self-image and his or her school achievement.[13] Research has also shown a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and increased school truancy, drop-out rates, violence, and vandalism.[14]I note that my opponent wishes to blame the hippies for everything, but that would be another debate.[1] http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org...[2] http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...[3] http://www.stophitting.com...[4] http://abcnews.go.com...[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...[6] http://debatewise.org... [7] http://www.principals.org...[8] http://www.nospank.net...[9] http://www.guardian.co.uk...[10] http://news.bbc.co.uk...[11] http://moourl.com...[12] http://www.historytoday.com...[13] Society for Adolescent Medicine, Ad Hoc Corporal Punishment Committee. (2003). Corporal punishment in schools: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 32, pp385–393.[14] Strauss, M. A. (2000). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families and its effects on children. (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Title: THW reinstate Corporal Punishment in schools Content: First I agree with Corporal Punishment should not be the only way to "encourage" pupils.. In my point of view, physical punishment should not only include hitting but should also include other kinds of physical actives; e.g running laps. In the modern society, as in more developed countries, Teachers will get in deep trouble for any corporal punishment towards their pupils, however, in many family, they still believe corporal punishment is the quickest way to punishment misbehaving child. If a child is about to preform a dangerous move, enforcing corporal punishment will make them remember better not to perform a certain activities in the future. Secondly, if verbal warning or shouting cannot stop the pupil misbehaving, physical punishment should take place. To argue your point on ruining the child teacher relationship, I believe as long as the reason of punishment was correct, it should not be any problem because there is a good purpose for the punishment.

Title: Corporal punishment in schools. Content: I will concede the debate. I prefer debates as an exchange of opinions and not as a listing of competing links. That's fine but I prefer debating our own opinions not posting those of others and calling them facts. In addition Con had the much stronger case. As a general rule corporal punishment in schools is a poor idea. But that doesn't mean there aren't times when the strap or other implement shouldn't be used.

Title: Corporal punishment should be banned from schools Content: My opponent supplies us by a new article from the famously liberal abc news. (I'm liberal myself but for this debate I have to admit that this is an extremely biased source). They essentially tear apart the idea of corporal punishment based on the 'theory' (for which no evidence is supplied) that corporal punishment increases aggression in children (which is ironic because you'd think having felt the force of violence that children would be less aggressive).Now I shall explain exactly why corporal punishment needn't be banned from SCHOOLS despite it's rightful ban in other places.As I said in round 1, " A teacher cannot threaten a detention, something they are allowed to do, without the retort of “but you can't take away my freedom”, “you have no right” or “I have rights”. In fact children are acutely aware of how much power they have over the teachers by way of laws and rights, and they use every opportunity to remind the teachers of that fact." corporal punishment would allow the teacher, in a strictly monitored manner, to spank the child for not only the original reason but for the rudeness of the remark, is rather ineffective and useless (and my opponent supplied zero evidence otherwise).Also,, was my contention that "If we re-introduced corporal punishment this back chat would cease and the power would be retained by the teachers. Detention is not going to be taken seriously by anyone. What does detention do other than waste your time? If you have ADHD or a creative mind you'll have a blast, effectively learning nothing to *correct* your behavior." The only point against this was that my opponent claimed to have first-hand seen reduction in repeats of detention as opposed to spanking issues but this easily could be because of more lenience in the school when it had detentions.I re-iterate that Between 1981, when corporal punishment was legal and in 1997, after the abolition of corporal punishment, there was a 67% increase in crime. (Source R#1)

Title: THW reinstate Corporal Punishment in schools Content: So we see that con has also brought into this scene that corporal punishment is physical use so i simply see that this would not work because it hardly benefits the student being punished and it also doesn't teach him that what he was doing was wrong. Secondly we see that this is a mistrust issue thus far and i see that the child would resent the teacher for and we cannot deny this fact because we are talking about teenagers at the moment and they are at a stage of mistrust and hatred to most figures in their lives. Now onto how I believe it will affect the child. I see that this entire idea of corporal punishment revolves around the fact that it creates a strict environment but i see that you cant create a safe learning environment out of fear children wont seek to do their best, learn what they can and wont try to be creative because of the fact that they will be scared that these ideas will result in corporal punishment. It oppresses the children and creates an environment where they can as parents think it is fine to do something similar to their children if they had it done to them. Rather i see that by giving them positive reactions to their positive behavior over punishing their negative behavior they will strive to be better and do positive things thank you

Title: All schools should bring back corporal punishment Content: Everyone enjoyed my Christmas dinner. I've just taken an apple pie out of the oven, so I'm finished in the kitchen now. Merry Christmas to all at DDO.Right...I'll start by summing up the scientific evidence.Studies of corporal punishment show that those who are so disciplined have significantly higher lifetime rates of anxiety disorders, alcohol abuse, and one or more externalising problems. Those who are spanked are significantly more likely to become wife beaters.Other studies show that children who are disciplined with corporal punishment are more aggressive.These effects remain when studies discount those who have been abusively hit.Research indicates that corporal punishment in schools can lead to students having a negative self-image, and can negatively affect school achievement. There is a correlation between the use of corporal punishment and increased truancy, drop-out rates, violence, and vandalism.In the short term, corporal punishment has been shown to be no more effective than other methods of discipline.Even if corporal punishment did not cause the above mentioned problems, then it would still be ineffective at preventing them. However, there is a body of evidence and theory which shows that corporal punishment is a stressor and can lead to a violent reaction. This establishes causation beyond mere correlation.My opponent failed to show that any of the things he claimed were linked were in fact linked.There is also the human rights issue which speaks against corporal punishment. My opponent has been unable to say why it is not okay to hit others, including prisoners, but it is okay to hit children. That is because it is not okay. Violence against children must stop.

Title: Physical Punishment. Content: I agree that children should be punished by their parents. But as far as school punishment goes the school administrative staff should recommend a certain action against the child but should have no authority in dealing out any physical punishment. If a teacher hits a student the there will be a massive uproar with people who are anti-violence and child abuse supporters will start a big fuss. In all you will cause a lot of trouble for a little problem.

Title: Corporal Punishment in schools Content: Good luck, Lordknukle.*******Why shouldn't it be legal?Trust IssuesCorporal punishment in school facilities involves the hitting/beating of a student if they have disobeyed class room or school rules. If corporal punishment were to be implemented as a form of disciplinary action, there is no doubt that students would cease to disobey rules. However, this method can and will severely damage a student's trust with their teachers. As a result of this, the student loses that connection with their teacher to the point where they can't go to them a source of comfort. For example: James, 13 years old, has continuously interrupted the teacher with his distracting behavior. As punishment the teacher hits James in the face and is sent back to his seat. Because this damages their teacher-student relationship, the student will most likely avoid using that teacher as a source of comfort for other issues he may be having (bullying, grades, etc).Family/peer issuesI believe that is either extremely disobedient in class or has bad grades has either or both of these: Abuse/neglect at home Bullying inside and outside of school At home: Lets refer to the year 2006. This year, 61% (or 1.25M) children were victims of some form of neglect. These include not only physical, but mental, educational, emotional, and even sexual (http://pediatrics.about.com...). Neglect and abuse at home has a tremendous effect on a child, and to prove this, please take the time to read some of these stories: http://www.forthechild.org... For more statistics: http://www.childhelp.org... These children (mostly young) were all subject to some form of abuse. I'd like to point out one girl's story: Judy: This young girl (age 10) was moved to 20 different foster homes. Her crazed step father had sexually and physically abused her for many years. As a result she threatened to commit suicide in a school bathroom (no relativity). Take Judy's story and add the factor of corporal punishment in school. This would only add to here extremely bad situation and would have most likely ended up worse than it did.Bullying: http://www.makebeatsnotbeatdowns.org.... This link provides statistics on bullying. Feel free to scroll through. There is no doubt that students in fear of any form of bullying would not want to be beaten by their teacher for disobedience because: 1. Teachers and school faculty are the "bully police", so to speak. If they are physically punishing their students, the victims of bullying are less likely to go to those people for assistance. 2. Along with bullying, corporal punishment can cause the student to suffer from a depressive state of mind, resulting in possibly lack of loyalty and decline in curricular performance. Lesson learned...?What does corporal punishment in schools (and everywhere for that matter) accomplish? As I've said before, it is used to gain the expected behavior of the target. However, if this does work, another problem unveils itself. Not only does this inflict harm on the student, but it also teaches the student that you need to use physical violence to resolve disputes with peers, family, etc. This especially would become a problem when they are put in a position of authority.ResolutionOther methods (detention, suspension, etc.) can be far more effective, and for that matter, safer. Things like detention and suspension will not teach the student to resolve issues violently and will most likely not provoke depression (if not already being experienced from other matters). For detention especially, the teacher can assign tasks such as cleaning the desks, extra class work/homework, all the things that a student without detention would not want to do. As a result, the disobedient student would cease to break faculty rules.********Looking forward to your argument.Sources listed: http://www.forthechild.org... http://www.childhelp.org... http://pediatrics.about.com... http://www.makebeatsnotbeatdowns.org...

Title: Corporal Punishment Should be Enforced in Schools Content: I would like to start off with the definition of corporal punishment, acquired from [1]. "Corporal punishment, physical chastisement of an offender. At one extreme it includes the death penalty (see capital punishment), but the term usually refers to punishments like flogging, caning, mutilation, and branding. Until c.1800, in many parts of the world, most crimes were punished thus, or by such practices as confinement in the pillory or stocks, which combined physical chastisement with the humiliation of an individual possible in a relatively small, cohesive society. Flogging was especially prevalent, being used also to keep order among the institutionalized insane and in schools and the armed forces. " I would like to remind the voters that this argument is based on corporal punishment in schools, not military, law enforcement, insane institutions, etc. I begin my argument with a list of the pros of corporal punishment in schools, which is what I will base my argument on. These are found on [2]. Teaches students discipline Deters bad behavior No suspensions Limits amount of educational disruptions These are several pros that can be justified in any modern day school system. With students today becoming more rowdy and rude towards teachers, less time is used for teaching, and more is used for issuing detentions, write ups, scolding in class, or other forms of punishment. This naturally would hardly deter any common misbehavior, as they would soon go back to their usual antics. Looking at the graph on [3], this illustrates how education in The United States has dropped from 1900 to present day. Keep in mind, the beginning of the 1900's to the late 1970's, corporal punishment was a widely used form of punishment in all schools across America. The message sent was clear. You go to school to learn, and you respect the teachers who give you this information. If the respect is not given, then you were punished. This undoubtedly kept students in line, a reason for the higher test scores. [4] shows the states who still use the method of corporal punishment, rarely, yet still in effect. For those who think corporal punishment allows for students to be physically "beat" I would like to use this next topic to show what forms of corporal punishment there are, and the restrictions. [5] lists the types of corporal punishment, and although many seems harsh, the most commonly used forms are that of canning, paddling, flogging and saucing. There are, however, restrictions set on corporal punishment, as seen in [6]. Such restrictions include male teachers not being permitted to use this punishment on female students, and vice versa with female teachers to male students. I end my debate here, as I still would like to include more arguments in my next round. I again thank Con for his acceptance to the debate, and hope for a fun clean interesting debate. I would like to remind voters that I am simply playing the devil's advocate and minority voice, and that the arguments may not reflect my personal opinion. I ask that you vote based on content and not beliefs, as these may not directly resemble my values. 1. . http://www.infoplease.com... 2. . http://www.ehow.com... 3. . http://www.google.com... 4. . http://www.infoplease.com... 5. . http://privateschool.about.com... 6. . http://www.educationrightscenter.org...

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment fosters violence in society.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment can cause serious physical damage

Title: Physical Punishment. Content: I am clearly for physical punishment as a method of education. Some parents today are not enough strict and they do not put enough restrictions to their children.In some cases this children take the wrong way, some parents try to look like a friend more than a father , but a children have enough friends, they need parents that , among other things , impose rules and make sure that their child respect them. In other hand, we have to make sure that we all know the differences between physical punishment and child abuse, I do not mean that this kind of punishment is appropriate like a daily thing, but I think that it could give good results in some situations. (I also think all I said could be used for the school too).

Title: Spanking In Schools Content: I will now summarize this debate and make a closing statement. Con has presented arguments that are self-contradicting: Should spanking "be banned from everywhere," including children's own homes, or is it "the parents [sic] choice" whether or not to spank their children? I have shown that spanking should not be banned universally, and I have also demonstrated that if parents are allowed to spank their children, it is also their right to choose a school that will do the same in an appropriate manner as well. My opponent also mentions studies that have shown that spanking "causes problems later down the road," but he has failed to present any of the studies in his sources. On the other hand, I have cited sources that show that corporal punishment is very effective, and I have also presented a testimonial from a teacher who was grateful for the ability to apply it in class due to its effective nature. Con has thrown claims around willy-nilly throughout the debate, but has not been able to back up any of them. The one piece of evidence my opponent has presented, i. e. the case of a child who went home to her mother with bruises on her bottom, has been shown to be unconvincing at best. The mother of the child was upset that the school was not implementing corporal punishment correctly, not that the school was enacting corporal punishment. The child was most definitely at fault, and faced a few bruises on her bottom as opposed to something that might appear in her permanent record. If anything, spanking was the correct decision in this case; it just should have been implemented differently, which only shows that supporting corporal punishment is better than abolishing it, as it can then be refined and implemented better. In addition to successfully refuting all of Con's points, I have done the following:-I have shown that spanking is similar in many ways to other forms of punishment that society imposes; to oppose spanking in schools (or in general) would be to argue a much greater point about punishment in general. -I have shown that spanking provides teachers with another tool to keep their classes progressing smoothly. -I have shown that spanking has benefits, largely due to its immediacy and proven ability to keep children from misbehaving. -I have shown that spanking is actually a great alternative to other forms of punishment imposed in schools, in that it does not potentially ruin a child's future. In closing, from looking at the exchange between Con and me, one must conclude that corporal punishment in schools is appropriate if carried out correctly, just like any other form of punishment society must use at various levels of misbehavior, whether the punishment is to send a criminal to prison or even to punish a dog to keep it from becoming unruly. Spanking should not be eliminated from schools everywhere, and if anything, it should become a more widespread practice.

Title: The Reintroduction of Corporal Punishment Into Schools Content: Hello to everyone reading. In this debate, I will be arguing that it is inappropriate and irrational to introduce corporal punishment into the entirety of the education system. I claim that corporal punishment is ineffective (and in most cases, harmful), leaves indelible psychological stains, and undermines the respect and benevolence within a teacher-pupil relationship. With the following contentions, I will elaborate on these claims.ArgumentsC1: Prohibiting Corporal Punishment Reduces AbuseWe can see in countries across the world that have prohibited corporal punishment in schools that this ban has reduced rates of abuse in the home. Since Sweden banned the use of corporal punishment in education institutions in 1979, the rates of support of this practice among parents have dropped form 50% to 11%, and in correlation with these rates, domestic abuse rates have fallen. By this example, we can conclude that when corporal punishment is banned in school, it reduces domestic abuse rates in the home, and is therefore productive and beneficial.C2: Corporal Punishment Has Long-Lasting Psychological EffectsBeing punished physically, even in a controlled, academic environment, is a shock to the system. This shock is amplified in young children. It has been concluded in numerous studies that corporal punishment increases the risk of dangerous and threatening behavior developing in the punished child. Corporal punishment has been linked to addiction and various other serious mental disorders.A study affiliated with the American Academy of Pediatrics found the following:"Harsh physical punishment was associated with increased odds of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug abuse/dependence, and several personality disorders after adjusting for sociodemographic variables and family history of dysfunction (adjusted odds ratio: 1.36–2.46)."This psychological harm can cause a growing resentment to authority, making it more challenging for the teacher to effectively impart knowledge to the students. Evidently, corporal punishment is ineffective in the short-term and long-term, and outweighs any of the (apparently) few benefits. As psychologist Elizabeth Gershoff writes:"Until researchers, clinicians, and parents can definitively demonstrate the presence of positive effects of corporal punishment, including effectiveness in halting future misbehavior, not just the absence of negative effects, we as psychologists can not responsibly recommend its use."C3: Corporal Punishment Undermines the Student-Teacher RelationshipStudents learn when they feel supported and comfortable in the teaching environment. Especially when the teacher utilizes corporal punishment, the students' trust in the teacher is severely damaged. As Edward Clark explains in his work "Creating a Context for Teaching and Learning", students do their best work when they are given positive reinforcement for successes rather than negative reinforcement for mistakes.Furthermore, when teachers attempt to impart lessons of acceptance and tolerance, students will not take these lessons to heart. Students will begin to associate teachers with the same type of violence they suffer at the hands of bullies and others which abuse them. This association, along with the natural resentment to authority explained in C2, effectively undermines the student's relationship to a teacher.C4: Corporal Punishment Can Be Used As A Tool for Non-EngagementCorporal punishment often draws away from the true nature of the problem, and instead focuses on the pure deterrence aspect. According to a principal of a school which uses capital punishment, many of the most commonly punished students are from struggling households where corporal punishment is more often administered. Physically punishing perhaps the most vulnerable students is not effective at teaching the underlying problem with their actions, often, it just escalates the problem itself.In states which allow corporal punishment as a means for teachers, 36% of these are above the national mean of state composite test scores, while 89% of the states that have banned this practice in schools are above the mean. This disparity has often been attributed to a lack of engagement to the student body by teachers, who use corporal punishment instead of engaging to find the root of the problem.-------------------------Overall, it has been proven and supported that banning corporal punishment reduces abuse in the home, and instituting this form of punishment in schools has negative psychological effects, undermines the relationship between students and teachers, and can be used as an excuse or cop-out for teachers instead of engaging with misbehaving students.It is resolved that the reintroduction of corporal punishment into schools would be inappropriate and irrational, for the above-mentioned reasons.-------------------------Sources(1) http://www.nospank.net...(2) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...(3) http://www.apa.org...(4) http://ojs.great-ideas.org...(5) http://www.newsweek.com...(6) http://www.gundersenhealth.org...

Title: It depends on how the actual punishement is administered Content: Assuming the person punishing knows exactly what they are doing and knows how to control themself, there should be no problem with Corporal Punishment at all, the rules of Corporal Punishment would need to be altered, obviously. Because as they are they could hurt the child, But if altered it would be perfectly reasonable to administer corporal punishment I would say speak for yourself, or at least what you know. If the majority of administered corporal punishment was done incorrectly then the history of child protective services would be a whole lot more radical. Corporal punishment has been used by a majority of households and education centers for thousands of years until very recently. There will always be those who abuse the system, but that does not mean the system does not work. Now that society- at least Western society is claiming to be so much better, or wiser than previous societies then at least it can come up with a more regulated and consistent implementation of such a practice.

Title: Assessment of Parental Ability Should Be Compulsive For All Expectant Parents Content: I concur with my opponents assertion that my stance on corporal punishment may have been seen as misleading. Please allow me to clarify. I personally don't believe that corporal punishment is the correct way to discipline a child. Discipline should be intended to educate, not punish for the sake of punishment. I believe it is confusing for a child to be told it is bad to strike others, then receive a physical strike from the very person who is trying to instill this lesson. In my country, smacking a child can be illegal. Parents have been charged and convicted of child abuse for administering a smack on the bottom for the childs misbehaviour - www.telegraph.co.uk/.../Father-arrested-and-locked-in-a-cell-for-smacking-son.html - (interesting to note here that the father asserts that he thought it would have been more reasonable to remove the child from the household, but not to arrest him! Fatherly concern indeed!). But to report every such case is to involve the child in an incredibly traumatic episode, causing more damage than the smack itself, and detracting from cases where child abuse is actually taking place. So I do not support anyone, even my friends, who smacks, and I think there is always a better method, but where there will be more damage to the child by taking action, and the parents seem caring, nurturing, people who are providing that child with the best upbringing they can provide, I would leave well enough alone. Smacking is covered by British law, I appreciate this may not be the case in other countries, and is considered acceptable by law if in the course of "reasonable chastisement". So allowances for this form of punishment are already in place, whether we agree with it or not. In any case where a mark is left, it should be investigated, and this is very clear. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/.../Smacking-the-rules.html Opinion is definitely split on the effectiveness of parenting classes. A group setting does not seem to be ideal, but success has been seen when professionals have worked on a one to one basis with parents - blog.cleveland.com/pdextra/.../theres_little_proof_parenting.html I apologise to my opponent for the lack of a link regarding the case of Fritzl. Information can be found here news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7371959.stm Neighbours and friends were aware that Fritzl had a daughter, Elizabeth, with whom he had his other children, but were told she had run away when in fact she had been incarcerated by her father. Allegedly even her own mother was unaware of her daughters imprisonment in their basement. My opponent is correct in his assertion that psychological illnesses are notoriously difficult to diagnose, although the techniques for diagnosis are improving as more is becoming known about the nature of these illnesses and disorders. And, of course the nature of psychological disorders can be that the person afflicted has had a lifetime to practise lying, which makes it more problematic to identify them. But does this mean we should simply not even try? And I can do nothing but agree with my opponents assertion about government failings. I wouldn't have a leg to stand on! I believe that, in setting up any kind of social agency, it should be run by people who have an idea of what it is like to live without the protection most politicians have been afforded in their affluent upbringing. In an ideal world, if this kind of scheme were to be put into operation, it would be manned by compassionate, empathic individuals who were dedicated to protecting potential abuse victims. My opponent makes a very good point regarding assessment of expectant parents. The alternative, which would be licensing conception, would be impossible to implement. People have sex. People have sex recklessly. Imposing some kind of penalty for conceiving a child "illegally" would result in an upswing of back street abortions, putting many lives at risk, or in concealed pregnancies and births, where a sick baby would not receive the assistance it needs. So I feel this could not even be considered. I don't believe that abortion should be enforced. I do, however, feel that the care system for children needs improvement, and that age should not be a barrier to adoption. There are plenty of very good homes for children, where the parents are simply deemed to be too old, at the age of 35, to adopt. However, in many cases, adoption would not be necessary, where only one parent is potentially abusive, and this could be monitored with the assistance of family members, the partner, doctors, and health visitors. I stated previously that I believe punishment should be intended to educate, and it is no different in the case of someone who exhibits potentially abusive character traits. Behaviours can be learned and unlearned, it is identification of psychological disorders that remains unaddressed. In conclusion, I would like to assert that I am fully aware that to have something as basic as conceiving, giving birth to, and raising a child under scrutiny by a government department is something that makes people - including myself - uncomfortable. I believe in a humans right to live freely. I also believe, however, that we all have a duty to send a clear message that we will not tolerate the abuse of vulnerable people. I have witnessed neighbours being interviewed on television news after the latest victim of abuse is removed from the house next door in a hearse, stating that "someone should have done something". Yet these same people scream about their rights when it comes to any new legislation, with blatant disregard for the rights of the children who are suffering in this way. My idea, I am fully aware, needs scrutiny, adaptation, clarification, if it were ever to be seriously considered. It would not be a solve-all solution, but simply a beginning. I simply believe we need to try to prevent this as far as possible. In cases like these, closing the stable door after the horse has bolted means burying another child.

Title: Corporal punishment Content: My rebuttal and argument is that corporal punishment on children (Example: spanking) does not work. Spanking children distracts the child from the real goal; when you spank the children will than focus on the punishment and will not focus on the reason their bad behavior was bad; this means they will continue with that behavior because they don't consider it bad behavior. Corporal punishment also makes children view aggressive and violent behavior as acceptable increasing their chances of being violent. A scientific study has found that children who grow up in schools that use corporal punishment performed worse on tasks then those growing up In schools that did not use corporal punishment. Corporal punishment results in children not internalizing rules and standards meaning that the only reason they don't do bad things is fear of corporal punishment; children who do not get spanked are more likely to believe in rules and laws meaning they don't do bad things because they view bad things as bad. http://scienceblog.com... Another study found that spanking kids leads to more long-term behavior problems. Meaning spanking does not work but in fact increases bad behavior. http://www.cnn.com... Another study found the same results as the first two. http://www.time.com...

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment represents failure to engage students

Title: Reinstate corporal punishment in schools Content: Oh gosh. Alright. Let's get this over with. When I was in fifth grade, I was going through severe depression and suicidal thoughts. I was acting out of line because of things happening at home, and if corporal punishment was allowed do you think that would help me in any way? Here's the answer: NO. Children can learn their lesson without physical pain. It's not so much that the teachers can't enforce rules because the punishment is weak, no. Instead, it's because some teachers are pushovers. Will corporal punishments help them not be pushovers? Likely not. Could the power be easily abused? Absolutely. My mom and dad have their experiences that they've shared with me. They find today's methods to be better and effective. And what about people with autism or bipolar disorder? Some of them aren't put into special classes. If they're in normal classes (which is more common than one may think), do you think they should suffer physical pain because of a mental illness? What if they're shutting down and don't respond? Oh, well, for giving your best efforts to keep calm, rather than being asked what's going on, you get your wrist smacked with a ruler and a wooden oar smacked against your a$$. Doesn't that sound pleasant and completely utterly reasonable? It shouldn't. Many teachers at the schools I've been to are hesitant to give a student punishment no matter how badly they're acting up. I'm not sure that corporal punishment would make a big difference, as they would probably avoid that. Gosh, sitting outside in the hallway was enough for a kid to learn their lesson the first time; it's humiliating. Though I haven't been there many times, a few of my classmates have and they always feel embarrassed. Always. So imagine that I'm teaching a class and you and a friend are talking. Oh no, the horror. How will the class ever survive? Well, it won't. So obviously you need to learn your lesson. I take a ruler and smack your wrist with it ten times, then go back to teaching. Now, you have a bruise on your wrist when instead you could've simply been told to stop talking.

Title: Corporal punishment being reintroduced to schools Content: I appreciate the chance to argue this topic. For semantic clarity, the two possible debate-friendly meanings of this debate's title read as follows: "Corporal punishment is being reintroduced to schools" - versus "no it isn't." "Corporal punishment should be reintroduced to schools" - versus "no it shouldn't." "Corporal punishment being reintroduced to schools" is like saying "Flowers being picked." One cannot agree or disagree, the sentence is worded as hypothetical. Based on my opposition's first round arguments, until otherwise specified, I will assume he means to use the latter, *should be* phrasing. That said, although public schools do not typically practice corporal punishment, it was never legally un-introduced from schools. 1. Parents are entitled to corporal punishment "Corporal punishment of minors within domestic settings is still lawful in 49 of the United States. Delaware outlawed it as child abuse in 2012" http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. Teachers are entitled to the same teaching methods as parents according to "In loco parentis," a legal doctrine adopted by both the United States and Britain. "this doctrine can provide a non-biological parent to be given the legal rights and responsibilities of a biological parent if they have held themselves out as the parent" http://en.wikipedia.org... A doctrine that was never removed cannot technically be reintroduced. To 'reintroduce' corporal punishment, we would have to first ban it, then reintroduce it. I argue that we should not reintroduce it because that would require us to take the time to unnecessarily ban it.

Title: Abuses do not demonstrate corporal punishment is inherently wrong Content: While it is true that corporal punishment can be abused, this does not demonstrate that it is always abused, or that it is inherently abusive. If it is used abusively, than measures should be taken to limit such abuse, instead of eliminating the practice altogether, which would be an over-reaction.

Title: Corporal Punishment Is Wrong Content: Here are a few of my arguments for corporal punishment. 1. Corporal punishment sets clear boundaries and motivates children to behave in school. If children are clearly given the fact that if they misbehave, they will be given corporal punishment, then this will make them more aware of what will happen to them and will make them think twice about their actions. A lot of the time corporal punishment is not told clearly enough to the child and they do not understand the consequences of their actions, and therefore misbehave. 2. Another argument for corporal punishment is that it is quick. Other forms of punishment such as detention or suspension in schools can hurt the student because the student can miss school, and waste hours on top of hours sitting in detention, while corporal punishment is quick and takes a second. So non corporal punishment can ultimately be a waste of time. 3. A study showed that kids who have corporal punishment misbehave less. In other words it deters misbehavior. If we have corporal punishment kids will not misbehave as much because of misbehavior. 4. Young children are not able to discern right and wrong to the decree that older age kids are. For example, if a young kid were to stick his finger in an electrical socket, then if you give them a smaller dose of pain, then it will teach them not to do life threatening things. Little kids don't understand being grounded. They don't understand their being punished. Rather with corporal punishment toddlers know that their experiencing pain and it teaches them not to do the wrong thing. 5. As corporal has decreased in public schools and home, you would expect to seem a decrease in misbehavior, but that hasn't been the case. This is why corporal punishment is better. It shows kids that they will be given physical pain if they misbehave. In conclusion, corporal punishment should be allowed. Sources used 1. procon.org 2. soapboxie

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment hampers children's creativity

Title: Corporal punishment Content: 1)The problem is that corporal punishment only provides a negative sanction on the specific circumstance. For example if a child punches another kid then corporal punishment only provides a negative sanction for punching another kid instead of kicking another kid. The corporal punishment directs focus on the major goal which is that hurting people is a bad thing; and in fact since corporal punishment is a form of hurt corporal punishment actually helps defeat the goal to make children understand that hurting people is a bad thing. 2)You said that "You stated that the child would focus on the punishment and not on the reason they were punished. Then you took a leap and made the claim that they will not consider it bad behavior because they focused on the punishment.". I didn't actually take a leap considering the fact that I posted several studies that support my claim and its conclusion. 3)Again I did not just state that corporal punishment causes children to become desensitized to violence; I posted proof that corporal punishment causes children to become more violent and more likely to commit a violent crime. 4)You make the claim, "The older generation that was raised with corporal punishment show more respect for the individual and society as opposed to the child today". I'd like to point out that you saying something is don't make it true. All you've done is put out a claim with nothing to support it. And now ill post some evidence that your claim is incorrect. The fact that crime rates have been steadily dropping ever since corporal punishment has been decreasing contradicts your claim. http://www.census.gov... Also states/countries with corporal punishment have higher crime rates than those who prohibit corporal punishment. http://www.census.gov... http://www.nationmaster.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... 5)I also would like to reiterate that I posted proof that corporal punishment does not work; I posted proof that it increases violent and bad behavior, and is detrimental to the mental development of children.

Title: All schools should bring back corporal punishment Content: I was really hoping for a more intelligent opponent. In the first round you cut and paste a paragraph that included sexual abuse and spanking OFTEN. We are debating corporal punishment. Then you cut and paste corporal punishment to reduce anti social behavior. That is not what a school would spank for. Then you assume that I would rather spank than warn. I always talked to my children and let them know why they were being spanked just like my school did when I was little. Then you talk of parents losing temper and smacking kids on the streets, again this is about school corporal punishment. Being spanked does NOT show children they can hit others as stated below. I showed with historical fact that school shootings have increased over the last 40 years. Many schools were stopping spanking before the states changed the laws. Then you tried to make a false claim that crime is high in the 19 spanking states and low in the 31 non spanking. I showed the facts of low income inner city crime. Then you get stupid with human sacrifice, slavery, astrology, murder and assault. They believed it worked, people would rather slave than die, astrology holds truth, murder and assault are by weak minded people. Read this Some "experts" claim that spanking has no instructional value, teaches children aggression, is abusive, or harms children's emotional and psychological well-being . However, these are myths. Myth: Spanking has no instructional value. Reality: Some claim that spanking does not teach children how to behave. This is false. Suppose you spank your child for running into the street. Spanking is a punishment, and punishments stop behaviors. By spanking your child, you stop him from running into the street. So you have taught your child how to behave: you have taught him not to run into the street. But what if you spank your child for talking back. The critics would say, you teach your child not to talk back, but you have not taught her how she is supposed to talk to you. But you teach her how she is supposed to talk to you when you scold her before the spanking. Before spanking, you make sure your child understands what she did wrong and how you expect her to behave in the future. In this way, spanking does have instructional value. The critics might then ask why not just tell your child how she is to talk to you and skip the spanking. Unfortunately, telling children what to do is not always enough. Children often do not change their behavior unless the behavior has negative consequences--and spanking is a powerful negative consequence. Myth: Spanking teaches children to be aggressive. Reality: Some argue that if parents spank their child, the child will learn that hitting is OK, so the child will go out and hit other children. But this is absurd. I've never heard a child justify hitting another child by saying that it's OK because mom and dad hit me. What spanking teaches is that parents may swat their child on the bottom when the child misbehaves. It does not teach a child hitting another child is OK. Nor does it teach that hitting for a reason other than punishment is OK. Most children will see this. A child who is old enough to be spanked understand there are differences between him and mom and dad. Mom and dad can drive a car but he can't. Mom and Dad go to work but he goes to school. So he understands that mom and dad can do things liking spanking that he can't do. Moreover, parents can explicitly tell the child that their spanking him is different form his hitting another child. Myth: Spanking is abusive. Reality: Spanking is not abusive. First, abusive parents often don't love their children. They abuse their children because they regret having them, the children remind them of someone else, and so on. But for most parents, spanking is done out of love and care for the child. Second, abusive parents lash out at their children in anger, not caring if they injure the child or not. But parents that spank do not want to injure their children. Spankings are given to correct the child's behavior. Yes, spankings hurt, but they are done so as to cause no lasting damage. That is why spankings are given on the bottom, for the posterior does not contain any vital organs. Do some parents spank too hard and cause welts and bruises? Yes, and they have gone too far. They have crossed the line between punishment and abuse. But this merely shows that some parents misuse spanking, not that spanking is abusive. Properly done, spanking causes no lasting physical damage. Myth: Studies prove that spanking harms children's emotional and psychological well-being. Reality: Some researchers have reported correlations between receiving corporal punishment and behavioral and emotional problems later in life. However, these studies have several flaws. First, most are correlational. Correlational studies can tell us only that two things are related, but such studies do not tell us how the two things are related. Suppose we see there is a correlation between spanking and delinquency. A correlation only means that spanking and delinquency are related--it does not tell us how they are related. Correlational studies can not tell us what we really want to know: what causes what. It might be that children are delinquent because they were spanked. But it might also be that they were spanked because they were delinquent? A correlational study can not tell us which of these two possibilities is true. Therefore, such studies do not prove that spanking causes delinquency, anti-social behavior, depression or anything else because correlation studies can not prove what causes what. Second, many of these studies looked at corporal punishment, not just at spanking. And some studies had a very "inclusive" definition of corporal punishment. They defined corporal punishment not only as hitting on the bottom but also slapping in the face, hitting on the head, boxing the ears, and shaking, among other things. Some of the forms of corporal punishment included in these studies could be considered abusive such as hitting on the head or boxing the ears. So even if we could conclude from these studies that corporal punishment causes emotional and behavior problems, and we can"t because the studies are correlational, but if we could, would it mean that all forms of corporal punishment cause emotional and behavioral problems or only the more severe, abusive forms like hitting on the head or boxing the ears? Larzelere1 found that when abusive forms of punishment were excluded from the definition of corporal punishment, researchers were more likely to find a beneficial outcome to using corporal punishment rather than a negative outcome. So abuse, not spanking, harms children"s emotional and psychological well-being. We know that many children are spanked and turn out fine; they are not aggressive, delinquent, depressed or anti-social. Why? Simons3 found that what leads to aggression, delinquency, and poor psychological well-being is low parental involvement such as parents not loving or trusting their children, not knowing where their children go or who they are with, and not being consistent in discipline. Being spanked did not lead to aggression, delinquency, and poor psychological well-being. Parents that love their children and are involved in their lives may use spanking, but they will never use spanking in a way that harms their children. 1Larzelere, R. E. (1996). A review of the outcomes of parental use of non abusive or customary physical punishment. Pediatrics, 98(4), 824-828. 2See for example, Giles-Sims, J. et al. (1995). Child, maternal, and family characteristics associated with spanking. Family Relations,44, 170-176. 3Simons, R. L. et al . (1994). Harsh corporal punishment versus quality of parental involvement as an explanation of adolescent maladjustment. Journal of marriage and the family, 56, 591-607. http://www.angelfire.com...

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment can ethically help save a child's future

Title: Physical Punishment. Content: As I understood you are agree with the Physical Punishment at 50% , you said that parents should use this kind of education with their childrens, but in other hand you are not agree with my idea that school could also use the physical punishment to educate the childrens. If you are agree with me at the point that the parents can use this kind of methods that means that you can see some positive point in physical punishment, and if you can see the good side of the physicall punishment at home , why can you not see it in the school? Its true that is not exactly the same , but when I said physicall punishment in school I mean like it was 30 years ago , there was physicall punishment but there was also some limits that the teacher have to respect.

Title: My 99th Debate: Kids and Corporal Punishment Content: Please do not accept unless you intend to invest effort and not forfeit. I look forward to an interesting discussion. You must've completed 3 debates to accept this and you must have a minimum of 2,500 ELO to vote on this. Full TopicOn balance, parental use of corporal punishment is beneficial for the child. Rules1. Pro accepts the sole BOP2. No forfeits3. Any citations or foot/endnotes must be provided in the text of the debate4. No new arguments in the final round5. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere6. No semantics or trolling7. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a lossStructureR1. Pro's presents his CaseR2. Con presents his Case, Pro rebuts Con's CaseR3. Con rebuts Pro's Case, Pro defends Pro's CaseR4. Con defends Con's Case, Pro rebuts Con's Case and CrystallizesR5. Con rebuts Pro's Case and CrystallizesThanks. .. .. .to whomever accepts; I eagerly look forward to a good debate!

Title: Should corporate punishment be allowed in schools or academies Content: Teachers in academies and schools use corporal punishments to change student's behaviour, but as soon as children get punished that way, the child will get mad and depressed. The child will start thinking that he is a bad person and a useless person. If they get punished like that too much they will become violent, and also they will become aggressive to their friends. Instead or punishing the teachers and parents should emphasis good behavior and applause them when they do something good, so they will feel better when they are prasied and will try better when their doing something positive. For example when a student is late for class the teacher should tell him or her to come a bit earlier next time. When teachers tell students to do something they will resist and maybe even ignore what teacher said if the teacher hits them instead of saying it in a good way. Some teachers hit them again if they don't listen. Then the student will try to quit the academy and if their parents are hitting them they might even decide to leave home.

Title: Corporal Punishment Is Wrong Content: I accept your challenge. I will prove that corporal punishment is the correct maneuver when it comes to disciplining children. I will also prove that other forms of punishment are defective and that corporal punishment is the best option when it comes to mounding a child for the future.

Title: Schools Should Have The Option To Use Corporal Punishment Content: First i'd like to start out with a definition. "Corporal punishment is the deliberate infliction of pain as retribution for an offence, or for the purpose of disciplining or reforming a wrongdoer, or to deter attitudes or behaviour deemed unacceptable. The term usually refers to methodically striking the offender with an implement, whether in judicial, domestic, or educational settings. " Next ill post a practical example. Lets say a teacher is teaching a class. A student in the class talks out of turn. He is given a WARNING, and then he does it again and is given another WARNING, now, he talks out of turn again, he is called up to the front (or after school, at the teachers discretion) and the teacher would use a ruler to hit the students palms. There, end of story! This is the only way to speak to children these days because if they were punished orally or given detention the student would be more likely to repeat that mistake again. Now, i will bring some evidence to support my arguments. An editor from childdisciplinewithlove. com states "[Corporal Punishment] That's the only language children understand, and they understand it instantaneously. That's how you can prevent children from spoiling. I'm good and successful today because my parents hit me when I did something wrong. That's why I'm doing well in life. I suffered no harm from my parents having beaten me. It has deterrent effect as well. If you beat one child in front of other children, not only that child learns to behave, others also learn a lesson to behave. Children try and test your limits. Show them some physical punishment so that they know it very clearly that each mistake of theirs will attract some physical punishment. •It is only fear which restrains children from misbehaving. Show the something to be afraid of and they will behave. Corporal punishment has instantaneous effect. Children obey and behave absolutely right when punished. Pampering and talking to them lovingly spoils them. There is no point in talking to them regarding solving any of their behavior problem because they are young and have no understanding of the worldly wisdom. So it's better not to waste time on taching them through talking. Just show them the fear of doing something wrong and they will do everything right. History of corporal punishment suggests that it has taught children to behave over last so many ages. " If you look at his last points it states that not only the child being faced with the punishment will learn but other children in the classroom will learn. Thank You.

Title: My 99th Debate: Kids and Corporal Punishment Content: In my family, we don't do punishment. I was never grounded, had my allowance stopped, or spanked. When issues of behavior came up, we sat around and discussed them. This is consistent with the morality of my family, and the type of community I grew up in, and I have every intention of raising my children in this same way, since it's my culture and I like it.Nevertheless, I'm not playing devil's advocate on this debate. I really do believe the resolution is right. It's not a strong belief, but on balance, all things considered, I come down on the side of the resolution rather than against it. I feel that my reasoning has a lot of parts to it, and it will be a challenge to lay out all the parts of it simply in a debate, so thank you to bsh1 for this opportunity to try it out.Parental ignorance theoryIn the nice, vaguely privileged world I grew up in, everyone goes to college and everyone agrees that corporal punishment is wrong. There are lots of reasons - the use of force on someone weaker is in itself abhorrent - and what lesson does it give children about power and relationships! - positive reinforcement is better than negative reinforcement, people should behave well not because they are afraid but because they are engaged with the consequences of moral behavior etc.And yet, most parents use corporal punishment. I am going to pause for a moment to lay out some evidence for this, because it's important.***************************************A study of parenting found that in 7 out of 9 countries, a large majority of parents had used corporal punishment in the previous month. Most parents in China, Kenya, Thailand, Colombia, Italy, Jordan, and The Philippines reported using corporal punishment. Just under half of US parents reported corporal punishment in the previous month, and only Swedish parents reported very low levels (keeping in mind that corporal punishment is illegal in Sweden, and so respondents may have felt constrained in answering the questions). (1)More than 70% of Americans agree that spanking children is an appropriate punishment (2).****************************************There are two ways to interpret this:A. On balance, corporal punishment is bad for children, but most parents around the world are ignorant/cruel and do it anyway. (Con's position)B. On balance, corporal punishment isn't bad for children. Parents know what they're doing. (Pro's position)I find it very difficult to accept position A because it runs contrary to something I believe to be true: that in general, people act in their own best interests and in the best interests of their children. Also, that people are more engaged in the problem of their own best interests than anyone else, and so are most likely to know what's best for them. Of course, we can all think of individual instances when people act against their own best interests, but here we are talking about global population trends. All around the world, the large majority of parents are using corporal punishment to raise their children. Con thinks they are misguided at best. I think that parents are biologically designed to care for their children, that in general they can't help acting in their children's best interests, that every society in the world recognizes parental expertise in raising their own children (if there are any exceptions I can't think of them). No better means of raising children has ever been found than trusting parents and supporting parents to do it. Therefore, I think we have to reject the theory that most parents around the world are wrong, while we are right.Which leaves us with interpretation B. Parents know what they are doing. But what about all the evidence about how bad corporal punishment is? What about all that stuff about it teaching aggression and the links to mental illness? I don't want to anticipate Con's arguments too much, but most research on corporal punishment comes from Western countries and it's done by college-educated middle-class types like me. The research is biased, and that makes a huge difference when it comes to interpreting the results. Authoritative vs Authoritarian Parenting Styles: How we got it wrongDiana Baumrind described four parenting styles in the 1960s, and the typology subsequently became very popular. There are four types, but for the current discussion only the first two are important:1. Authoritative Parenting: "attempts to direct the child's activities but in a rational, issue-oriented manner...encourages verbal give and take, shares with the child the reasoning behind her policy, and solicits his objections when he refuses to conform"2. Authoritarian Parenting: "values obedience as a virtue and favors punitive, forceful measures to curb self-will at points where the child's actions or beliefs conflict with what she thinks is right conduct. She believes in keeping the child in his place..." (3) In the decades after this typology was described, research paper after research paper showed that of the types, the authoritative style was most closely linked to good outcomes for children, from happiness to results at school. For example on this site, The Positive Parenting Centre, (4) makes it clear that the authoritative type is the good one, it is described as "a warm, nurturing, accepting manner", which contrasts with the authoritarian type which is "extremely strict" with "little or no input from the child" and is associated with strict rules and punishments. On the site Parenting Science, the writer states that "authoritative parenting is associated with the best child outcomes" and this conclusion has been common (5).It has only been very recently that the truth has been revealed: authoritative parenting is indeed associated with the best outcomes but only in specific Western cultures. For example, a study in the US, Hong Kong and Australia showed that the authoritarian parenting style was associated with high academic achievement for children in Hong Kong and for those in Australia and the US whose parents did not have a college education. (6)This is worth repeating. Strict, rule-based, punishment focused parenting styles were linked to the best outcomes for non-Western children and for Western children whose parents didn't go to college.Whereas among the Western middle-classes where I grew up, this type of authoritarian parenting style is linked to poorer outcomes.As this study explains (7), parents from different countries and social groups relate to their children in different ways. In the western middle-classes, closeness between parent and child is a mediator in enforcing discipline, but this is not always the way that it's done elsewhere. Therefore, we cannot take conclusions about best parenting practices from our own culture and apply them universally.Corporal Punishment and OutcomesCorporal punishment is effective in improving child behavior in the short-term. Even opponents agree that this is true.(8)However, it is the long-term effects that opponents are worried about, including increased aggression, mental health problems and difficulty internalizing morality.Here's the thing. African Americans are three times more likely to endorse corporal punishment than are other Americans.(9) African American children are more likely to have "mental problem" status (10) and be arrested and coded as delinquents (11) than are other types of American children. So yes, you plug all that into a data analysis and you will get a correlation. Corporal punishment. Mental health problems (depression and anxiety mostly). Aggression. Failure to internalize those moral values.Could it be that black parents are simply more ignorant, or just worse than the rest of us? Could it be that a simple process of disciplining children could unleash such a range of terrible outcomes?Obviously not. It's just another example of how correlation mistaken for causation and mixed up with racially biased data collection. It's possible that not all black parents are gagging for their children to internalize a conforming morality. Maybe some parents want their children to develop a healthy disrespect for authority while realizing that breaking the rules can lead to harsh consequences because black people are six times more likely to go to prison than white people (12). Maybe there's more going on here.SummaryWe need to choose. Is it that:A. Parents who aren't white or who don't have a college education are just ignorant and bad; orB. All parents are doing their best in different circumstances, and when our theories are based too narrowly on our own circumstances, we can get it wrong.I don't think we can dismiss the the opinion of the majority of Americans and the actions of the majority of parents around the world as ignorance and cruelty. I don't think we can conclude that college-educated Westerners simply know better than everyone else about raising children, because we really don't.It goes against everything I was raised to believe, but I'm forced to conclude that on balance, when it occurs, parental use of corporal punishment is beneficial for the child.(1) http://downloads.hindawi.com...(2) http://fivethirtyeight.com...(3) http://www.devpsy.org...(4) http://www.the-positive-parenting-centre.com...(5) http://www.parentingscience.com...(6) http://www.jstor.org...(7) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com...(8) http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org...(9) http://www.honors.ufl.edu... (10) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... (11) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... (12) http://www.naacp.org...

Title: Spanking your children Content: Spanking children should be a last resort of discipline, but it is not necessarily a wrong thing to do. Aggressive forms of discipline have been used for years, and normally it is effective. When used appropriately, spanking can teach kids that not everyone in life is going to sit down to have a nice talk about what you did wrong. Children also learn that when you break a rule there are severe measures that go way beyond getting a stern talking to and less TV time. Not only that...forms of aggressive punishment methods are all around us. A few examples are the death penalty and torture in interrogation. Both use "more violent" methods as their last resort. Though not as sever spanking a child isn't as cruel and uncommon as many say it is.

Title: Resolved: Parents ought not use corporal punishment to rear children Content: The rules that he established are acceptable enough, so I agree with them. Most of his definitions are fine for the debate as well, except my opposition to his definition of "corporal punishment. " I will also provide a definition of "ought. " Corporal Punishment: intentional infliction of physical pain as a method of changing behavior. Corporal punishment becomes abuse if it results in injury. (National Association of School Nurses)Ought: Used to indicate duty or correctness, especially when criticizing someone's actions; used to give or ask advice. Now, to my debate:Contention 1: Corporal punishment is not proper for child rearing. In order for a parent to fufill his/her full duty as a parent, the parent must provide the most effective use of discipline against a child's behavior in order to be of aid in both the short and long term. Although corporal punishment has been proven to be effective in the short term for at the very least most children, it is utterly useless in the long run and can even end up to be harmful for the child in question. The use of corporal punishment against a child, thus, is not the proper choice for parental rearing of a child and goes against a parent's duty and idealisms of correctness. Sub 1a. Corporal punishment is ineffective in the long-term. The primary intention of corporal punishment is to install discipline in the child and make him/her learn what is correct behavior. The main problem with corporal punishment is that it serves well to discipline children in the immediate short-term, but as a practice to discipline children, it is ineffective to achieving the means as to what the punishment itself was meant to be for. Scientific studies display this well. In E. T Gershoff's 2002 study on the effects of corporal punishment: " She found that CP decreases internalization of moral rules. This is concerning in that parents are more likely to use corporal punishment when they believe the child is at fault for some misbehavior. Thus, using a method that decreases moral internalization to respond to a failure to adhere to internal rules the child should have known is likely to perpetuate the problem. "Gershoff, E. T. Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 539-579In the same study as well as others, Gershoff reports to us that the use of corporal punishment encourages a child's use of aggression: "She found that CP is associated with increased aggression. This is especially troublesome, she notes, in that parents are more likely to use aggression to stop aggression. However, one study showed that use of corporal punishment to halt aggression increased risk for aggressive behaviors by 50%, regardless of whether the parent or the teacher rated the child’s behavior. Use of aggression after being physically punished for aggressive behavior is likely to be seen as an escalation of misbehavior, which was also associated with greater use of corporal punishment. Thus, corporal punishment is likely to perpetuate the problem". http://ace.ucr.edu...http://www.coe.int...http://www.nospank.net...http://www.neverhitachild.org...http://www.cyc-net.org...Sub 1b: Corporal punishment can cause physical and psychological harm. In addition to the general ineffectiveness of corporal punishment, the use of it thereof can lead to psychological harm and can go leeways into abuse as a result. These mental afflictions as a result from corporal punishment can result in alcohol abuse, adult psychological distress, and other negative effects in the future. This is not including the effect on the child's use of aggression to assert means. . http://www.questia.com...Also, the line between corporal punishment and abuse is very thin. Corporal punishment can end up resulting in injury as shown in several cases and studies, including the previous Gershoff 2002 study, where she reported the following: She found that CP is associated with increased adult abusive behavior. She reports studies have shown that 2/3s of abusive parent-child incidents begin as an effort to discipline the child and “teach them a lesson. ” If this means that adult antisocial behavior is more likely after being spanked as a child, given that other research shows antisocial parents are at greater risk to abuse children, then this could mean that spanking one’s child may increase the risk of abuse for one’s grandchildren. ". http://www.nospank.net...Sub 1c: There are effective alternatives to corporal punishment. Not only are there so many disadvantages to the use of corporal punishment, but there are also alternatives to the use of corporal punishment that are more effective than corporal punishment. This is mainly shown by the success of European countries that had outlawed corporal punishment and had reducing numbers in the amount of child abuse cases as well as reductions in public opinion where people believed that the use of corporal punishment is required for any child for effective parenting: . http://www.neverhitachild.org...Other experts report on the same thing:. http://www.psychologytoday.com...http://www.unicefusa.org...Contention 2: Corporal punishment is a violation of human rights. The argument that corporal punishment is a violation of human rights (defined by both European organizations as well as the UN with their Universal Declaration of Human Rights) is starting to take root, and these leading groups have made the argument that corporal punishment is indeed a violation the human rights of the child:"Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) have progressively condemned corporal punishment, first in penal systems and schools and more recently in the home. Other decisions have also made clear that banning all corporal punishment does not breach family privacy or religious rights. The Court increasingly applies the standards of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in judgments related to children. "" Once visible, it is clear that the practice [of corporal punishment] directly conflicts with the equal and inalienable rights of children to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity. The distinct nature of children, their initial dependent and developmental state, their unique human potential as well as their vulnerability, all demand the need for more, rather than less, legal and other protection from all forms of violence. " -- United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child . http://www.coe.int...https://wcd.coe.int...Because corporal punishment can result in injury, the subjection of it to a child is a violation of a child's human rights defined by the Universal Declaration

Title: Spanking Content: I believe that while spanking should not be the default punishment, it IS* an effective way of punishing children that, when kept within limits, is perfectly acceptable. *The use of words being totally in caps during this debate will be to emphasize words, not to express yelling.

Title: Spanking In Schools Content: Spanking shouldn't be allowed in schools because it's the parents choice weather or not to spank their child. It should be banned from everywhere. An example is the girl from Texas who got spanked by a male administrator and had bruises on her bottom when she came home hours later. That is not acceptable! Spanking is not the best in general but definitely not in schools. Sources: cnn.com

Title: Spanking Content: Although spanking was a very modern and common method of punishment times have changed. Children have changed. If a child goes to school and says the words, "My daddy/mommy hit me," children services are going to get involved. Some children will do so in spite. Other methods of punishment are available and have been found to work. I don't see as to why if there is other, less violent solutions we need spanking. You don't need to hit your child to teach them what they did was wrong.

Title: Should parents hit their children Content: Many cultures and people believe that hitting their children as a form of punishment is beneficial for the child. I'm not saying beat children I'm talking about how corporal punishment should be promoted in moderation. Corporal punishment sets boundaries for children and motivates them to do better, as stated by Okey Chigbo in a 2004 article. Harold Bennet, PhD, President and Dean of the Charles H. Manson Theological Seminary, stated, "children need to understand boundaries and I think that children need to understand that there should be punishments... in direct proportion to the improper behavior that they might demonstrate."

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: It is dubious that corporal punishment helps discipline children.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment fosters criminality and delinquency.

Title: other sanctions have no effect Content: It is all well and good those on the sidelines saying that giving children a small wrap on the knuckles is morally outrageous but they are not the ones who witness appalling behaviour in the classroom. If you ask the teachers, those on the front line of disruptive students, a recurring comment is that with corporal punishment off the agenda, there are no sanctions available to teachers for the most stubborn of terrors!

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment does not represent teacher failures

Title: Should Corporal Punishment be allowed at school Content: Corporal punishment means physical torture. This could be in the form of beating, canning, thrashing or even whipping. Corporal punishment is a common feature in schools. Several incidents of such punishment have been reported in the newspapers. Such kind of punishment can physically impair a student for his whole life. It may also affect him psychologically, disturb his mental balance. This kind of punishment should be stopped immediately. The method to discipline a child through corporal punishment was first practiced during the medieval period and is old-fashioned. Teachers should deal with their students patiently, advising and guiding them in every sphere of life. The term, 'Corporal punishment' means 'physical punishment'. It is a kind of punishment that affects the human body adversely. This could be in the form of beating, thrashing or even whipping'. Thus, punishment of this kind is physical torture to a student and should be condemned and stopped immediately. Moreover, such kind of punishment may sometimes physically impair a student for his whole life. Psychologists are of the opinion that such a punishment can affect a student mentally, for a very long period of time. In India Corporal punishment has become a common feature in schools. Several incidents of physical assault have been reported in the newspapers. For instance, a student of class XII from a popular school in Udaipur and a student from Delhi Municipality Corporation School died due to the beating, they received from their school teacher. This is shocking. In another incident, a class XI student in Ahmedabad accused a teacher of having hit him so hard that he suffered a temporary loss of hearing. Making a student kneel down or stand for hours, pinching and slapping are all set to be banned under plans to widen the definition of Corporal punishment in schools. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has suggested a code of regulations on the conduct of teachers in schools. A standout feature of the code is a total ban on corporal punishment. So far, only six Indian states have banned the cane in schools. Corporal Punishment is just another form of physical violence and has no place in an enlightened society. However there are numerous instances of milder punishment that go unnoticed. There is enough evidence to suggest that teachers, including those at elite schools, physically and verbally intimidate children, some of whom could be as young as five years old. There is unfortunately no national law banning cruel or unusual punishment in schools. The National Policy on Education merely says that corporal punishment is not permissible. Discipline is a must for students in schools and colleges. However, enforcing it through Corporal punishment is highly objectionable and rather, inhuman. This kind of punishment was generally practiced during the medieval period, and is very old-fashioned. Moreover, this is not the right procedure or technique to discipline a student. Teacher should realize that children at the school level are at an impressionable age. If they are subjected to such kind of physical torture, they may develop a fear (phobia) to approach or meet a teacher, or even attend the school. They will never respect and love their teachers which is very essential for the overall development of a student's personality. This is because a guru or a teacher is a role model for a student. He must set an example for his students through his behavior and actions. He must deal with his students patiently, advising and guiding him to excel in every sphere of life such as academics, sports, music and various other extra-curricular activities. A student must also be free and friendly with his teachers, ask questions, clarify his doubts etc. At the same time, he should always respect and obey his teachers. However, this obedience and respect cannot be demanded forcibly through corporal punishment. It can only come spontaneously through deep regard for one's teachers. Supreme Court states that 'children are not subjected to corporal punishment in schools and the they should receive education in an environment of freedom and dignity, free from fear. National Policy on Education directs the school authority to take necessary action in the matter, so that the pernicious practice of affecting physical and mental health of children can be nipped in the bud. Corporal punishment does not have any positive effect on a student. If further worsens the situation. For instance, a student who is very naughty, or least interested in studies, when subjected to corporal punishment, may become more aggressive in nature. He may even leave the school and studies. Nonetheless, such a drastic decision can be disastrous for a child's future. Corporal punishment may even cause permanent physical disorders in a child. For example, hard slapping upon the ears can make him totally deaf for the rest of his life. Harsh whipping and canning in the hands and legs can damage the bones and muscles paralyzing him completely. There are some people who would say scolding of school children and verbal intimidation should not be outlawed. This argument is flawed. Verbal abuse could be as damaging and humiliating for children, especially the younger ones, as physical punishment. Parents often complain to schools authorities against abusing their children in school. But they are too often cowed by school authorities to raise their voice. In such a situation, there is no alternative but for the state government to interfere. To conclude, it must always be borne in our mind that teaching is one of the noblest professions where one imparts knowledge to others. The teacher must consider his students as his own children, and treat them as lovingly and caringly as possible. He should applaud a student's achievements, and help him to overcome his shortcomings by motivating him to pursue his interests. A teacher should be there to guide a student to become responsible, educated and a well-groomed citizen of a country. While handling students, it must always be kept in mind that they are like flowers. They have to be nurtured with great care to help them blossom and spread their fragrance.

Title: Corporal Punishment of Children Content: Children should be subject to corporal punishment because of many reasons. One reason being it will get your point across without being to forceful. A little physical interaction with your kid will help them know their right from wrong. If they had a bad experience doing something good or bad they will tend to do it less or not at all. So if they did something bad and you used a little physical interaction to show that their actions are not tolerated and will not be tolerated. It could be only beneficial as long as the physicality doesn't increase or get to violent. Or if the child isn't old enough to receive such punishment for their behavior. However I also feel the parent should be allowed to be able to discipline their child however they want as long as they aren't endangering the child's life. Or like previously stated if they are old enough to receive such discipline and not to much physicality.

Title: It depends on how the actual punishement is administered Content: I agree. But most of the time the "punisher" does not know how to control himself so we have to keep the law in place. Majority rules. Also if corporal punishment were to be altered to not hurt a child, it would not be called corporal punishmen. It has no relation to why you should have corporal punishment the debate topic that we are discussing

Title: bad behaviour is on the increase in the class room Content: One in five teachers? That is the also the figure then of how many teachers need more training! The only reason why a minority of teachers want to see a reintroduction of corporal punishment is because they do not have any effective discipline methods under their belts. The answer? More training, not resorting to corporal punishment. Also remember that school is for learning and it is the teachers job if the students are doing poorly. Corporate Punishment is just and excuse for teachers to whip and hurt people

Title: Corporal punishment on children by thier parents. Content: WheezySquash8 voted in my poll that I should debate this topic. The poll's not over yet, so jump in if you want. There won't necessarily be 1 winner. http://www.debate.org... I am taking the position that corporal punishment is an effective and non-detrimental way of disciplining children, by their parents, as long as the reason for discipline is correct, punishment is proportionate, and no permanent physical harm is done. (Spanking with hand or switch, etc.) If the challenged does not wish to accept, this will turn open.

Title: Spanking In Schools Content: Thank you for your rebuttal as well as your compliment. You are a very courteous individual--to the voters: please take this into account for the conduct vote. Before I write my argument, I must make a small amendment to my rebuttal that has no bearing on its integrity. I wrote "capital punishment" in the very first paragraph where I meant to write "corporal punishment." If there was any confusion, I apologize. "Spanking in schools has been eleminated [sic] in many states including Iowa where i live. Im [sic] neutral when it comes to spanking by parents, but im [sic] school? I think not." States disagree on many things. I'm glad you live in a state that is in line with your views. If your point is that "the majority says so, and therefore it's right," I encourage you to look at history. People have universally agreed upon things that we would universally disagree with, such as slavery and using tobacco as medicine. Besides that, as shown by the source in my first argument, there are still plenty of states--over a third--that allow corporal punishment in schools. "We teach our kids not to hit, but when we spank them we are hitting their bottoms." I am guessing the implication of this statement is that by spanking children, we are sending a confusing message to our children by doing what we tell them not to, or even being hypocritical. I agree with you in that as a society, we don't want our children to become violent for unjust reasons. However, I disagree that spanking is therefore a bad idea. In fact, that is one reason we spank children--to teach them that violence only leads to more pain, both for the perpetrator and the victim. However, we are in no way sending a confusing message to children or being hypocrites by spanking them; we also teach children not to kill people, and yet the majority of states still enact the death penalty [1]. We also detain people, shoot people, and even send others to be tortured [2] [3] . Granted, these are suspected terrorists and people from foreign countries, but my point still stands: we do not teach our children to be mean to others just because they are from other countries, nor do we teach them to treat people in this manner. I should point out here that even without the points I just made, your argument goes against corporal punishment in general and not specifically corporal punishment in schools. If parents teach their kids not to hit others but spank their children anyway, they are doing the same thing. For your argument to be sound, you would have to be against parents spanking their own children as well. This goes against your first argument, which states that parents should have the choice of whether to spank their children, as well as your second, in which you state that you are neutral on the matter. "While you bring up a good point str chudies[sic] have shown that spanking causes problems later down the road." I wholeheartedly encourage you to show me these studies (I'm guessing that's what you meant) in your next argument, which is your last. I have sources that show that spanking works, too [4] [5]. One study by the APA, in fact, was inconclusive at best [6]. Even with sources, your point is not a strong one; the scientific community still disagrees on many things, and as I have shown, this one is still up inconclusive. Also, keep in mind that our beloved country, the United States, was built from the ground up by people who were spanked and rapped on the knuckles in school, and I would argue that they built something truly beautiful that the whole world has looked to for leadership and support. Would people who had problems "later down the road," i.e. as adults, have done something this magnificent? I think not. Again, however, I must point out that the minute you present the studies you speak of, you are contradicting yourself once again. If spanking causes problems later down the road, why are you yourself okay with parents doing it? How does the background of the person doing the spanking make any difference for the child being spanked? The original argument you presented is specifically about spanking in schools, not about spanking as a method of discipline in general. "Also, instead of a bend over and let me swat your butt, why not do a detention or a in school suspension." I have addressed this. I am not against other forms of punishment, but teachers have difficult jobs as it is; allowing corporal punishment gives them one more tool to make their jobs easier and to help students study in a focused environment [4]. Additionally, I have already pointed out that one benefit of spanking is that it prevents things like suspension and expelling, which goes on a student's permanent record. Let's be honest here; kids have no idea what they're doing. To make them live with their misdeeds for the rest of their lives in the form of a permanent record is only cruel, whereas if a quick spanking does the job, why not do that instead? "How would you like it if someone that you barely know walks by sees your on your phone and says okay stick that butt in the air. I would be a little concerned." How would you like it if someone you barely know drives by, sees you going a little bit faster than other drivers, pulls you over, and makes you pay a $150 fine? People get punished all the time by people they do not know, i.e. the police. This is nothing new. Being punished by people "you barely know," if you know them at all, is part of living in a civilized society. "And with just a spankingby [sic] a parent the CPS gets all huffy puffy. Why dont [sic] they do that when a kid gets spanked in school? It just makes no sense at all." I agree; why the hypocrisy? CPS should lay off corporal punishment in general. I'm glad we could agree on that. Once again, I urge you to list your sources individually instead of putting up a large website for voters and me to search through. Thank you for your rebuttal. I look forward to your concluding remarks. Sources: [1] http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org... [2] http://www.time.com... [3] http://history1900s.about.com... [4] http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com... [5] http://www.albany.edu... [6] http://www.apa.org...

Title: Children should be physically punished Content: The motion for this debate is whether children should be punished for their offence. I am taking "For" side. 2 rounds is for arguing and the last one is concluding arguments. All children misbehave as at the beginning they simply don't know what is good and what is bad. Discipline of children is essential part of bringing them up and their health development, it is as important as feeding them or clothing. It has to be both physical and mental. But many parents get confused about physical discipline and I do not get reasons to be afraid of it. 1. First of all, physical punishment implies spanking/slapping and making child do something (eating soup, for example). In my opinion, the misbehavior of children has become a problem of our time. Parents cannot deal with their own children anymore, they get nervous and ashamed of children's awful acting on people. Of course, there is always a possibility of mental discipline - talking and explaining things. But from my own experience, I can surely say that it actually doesn't always work well. Good if child understands you, which happens sometimes. But what about cases when instead of it he gets mad and hits you? Especially, in the public place and he cannot calm down. I think that the child has to realize who his parents are and what respect he should have. Spanking may work in this case. 2. "Once burned, twice shy". Getting hit once, there is a chance that he would understand that it is bad thing and he should avoid doing it. The child tries different things out of curiosity and there is always danger for his life. Talks don't work in this case - it can even provoke bigger interest and desire to try. One little spank can show him that he should never try it again.

Title: Spanking In Schools Content: First I feel the need to comment you on how convincing you are. Spanking in schools has been eleminated in many states including Iowa where i live. Im neutral when it comes to spanking by parents, but im school? I think not. We teach our kids not to hit, but when we spank them we are hitting their bottoms. While you bring up a good point str chudies have shown that spanking causes problems later down the road. Also, instead of a bend over and let me swat your butt, why not do a detention or a in school suspension. How would you like it if someone that you barely know walks by sees your on your phone and says okay stick that butt in the air. I would be a little concerned. And with just a spankingby a parent the CPS gets all huffy puffy. Why dont they do that when a kid gets spanked in school? It just makes no sense at all. Thanks for challenging me Sources: cnn.com

Title: Spanking Content: The point of my opening argument is that spanking is an effective way to punish children. Please note, though, that I do believe spanking has its limits. I do not believe in spanking as soon as a child disobeys. I also do not believe spanking should be done with a harsh tool, especially not a belt. Now onto my argument. Spanking is often a very effective way of punishment because the effects are IMMEDIATE. Unlike a grounding or a "time-out" you can not merely defy a corporal punishment. In fact, spanking can be used to teach as a part of discipline. Example: your two-year old son is hitting his older sister. He won't listen to your reprimands because he doesn't want to and doesn't see any valid reason two. If you demonstrate to him what hitting feels like, he will feel less inclined to hit his sister because he realizes it hurts. Even if this is not the case, he has a valid reason now not to continue. Spanking can be used as a helpful way to teach even more so if you show your love for you child after the punishment and show you just want to help them. If you follow this pattern, your child will be much less likely to be negatively affected by the punishment. There are plenty of real life examples of people who have benefited from spanking. My own grandpa was a "wild child," so to speak. He told a story of how he was sent to a special school for kids who were called a "wild child". He was spanked till he bled, which would never even be allowed today, but he says he was thankful for the punishments in the long run. They straightened him out and he ended up graduating with the highest honors a student at that school could receive. So, what's your rebuttal?

Title: Spanking/Smacking children is more beneficial than harmful. Content: I will be arguing that spanking/smacking children FOR disciplinary reasons is more beneficial to them than it is harmful. If you need clarifications please post your questions in the comments.

Title: Physical Punishment Content: Punishment should not be given as physical assault is illegal and I do not believe teachers want to go to jail. Pro seems to give a number of guidelines to follow, but who will be there to monitor them? No one. Teachers are free to abuse it all they like. Maybe they had a bad day and decide to hit some kids. Who would be there to stop them? No one. How can we judge whether it's 'too violent'? We can't. It is also impossible to rationally deduct that physical punishment will directly lead to a child questioning all future decisions. Pro has given no reasoning or evidence for this.I will now provide some psychological evidence that beating a child is bad for their development.Physical punishments result in long term effects of depression, anxiety, substance abuse in later years, and a slew of other problems[1].They result in a higher incidence of health issues in adult life such as cardiovascular disease[2].Children who are hit are more likely to grow up to be aggressive[3].It simply teachers children to avoid getting caught rather than attacking the heart of the issue - not doing it at all[4].There is no evidence that physical punishment is beneficial[5].[1] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...;[2] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...;[3] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...;[4] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...;[5] http://www.cmaj.ca...;

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Better ways exist; corporal punishment is lazy way

Title: It is wrong and inappropriate. Content: So by having this atricle you are stating that parents can not punish their children or teachers can not punish their pupils for misbehaving and causing a disruptance in class rooms and at home? If we all were to follow this article and not punish our children by "striking the fear of God into them" as some say how are we supposed to punish the children? Children are already violent already, by not ceasing this to happen and using corporal punishment it will be come a "living hell" as my father says. I know for a fact cause I was a child at first that slaping a kids hand or grounding them does nothing to cease the problem but makes them more defiant towards rules. By doing this how are we supposed to prepare them for the real world because after you make a big mistake the cops are not going to smack you on the hand and put you in the corner. NO there will be much bigger concequences. So do you want a diciplined next generation or a misbehaving unlawful generation? You tell me... You do realize that most people who beat their children are doing it because it worked for them when their parents used to beat them as children? Also, what makes the U.N. transcendant and all-knowing. I agree with its sentiment, but it is largely mistaken if it thinks that corporal punishment is abuse. Abuse kills, corporal punishment does not.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: Corporal punishment is justifiable as a last resort

Title: Corporal punishment is a good tool for disciplining unruly children Content: Walter Williams. "Making a Case for Corporal Punishment". Bnet. Sept 13, 1999: "Regardless of what the experts preached, the undeniable fact is the 'uncivilized' practice of whipping children produced more civilized young people. Youngsters didn't direct foul language to, or use it in the presence of, teachers and other adults. In that 'uncivilized' era, assaulting a teacher or adult never would have crossed our minds. Today, foul language and assaults against teachers are routine in many schools. For some kinds of criminal behavior, I think we'd benefit from having punishment along the lines of Singapore's caning as a part of our judicial system."

Title: Spanking In Schools Content: Hi there, Grantholben! I look forward to having a spirited debate with you. Since capital punishment is already enacted in many states (Source 1) and you're looking to make the claim that those states should change their policies, the burden of proof is on you; I only need to refute each of your arguments, but I will also bring in a few of my own here and there to emphasize my point of view.The first argument you presented was that "spanking shouldn't be allowed in schools because it's the parents [sic] choice weather [sic] or not to spank their child." While I agree that parents should have the final word on how their children are treated in many cases, it should be noted that society has a responsibility to ensure that each individual's rights are not infringed upon by others. If a man commits a mass murder, for example, it shouldn't be up to his parents to decide how to punish him; we have a legal system in place to ensure that others' rights are not infringed upon, and we as a society take care of the problem by entrusting his fate to others. The man would be sent to prison for life or possibly be executed, depending on the circumstances of the crime and the state he committed the crime in.Similarly, if a boy in a school is putting others in danger or disrupting the class in some way, the parents should not always be the final authority concerning how he is punished. In some cases, the teacher needs to punish the student to make sure the classroom doesn't fall into chaos. A teacher needs to do his or her job, and all of the other students have a right to education without interruption from the boy. In fact, if all else fails and a spanking is deemed the only way to convince the boy to listen to the teacher and learn, then it's a win-win-win: the teacher is able to teach; the other students in the class can learn in an ideal, disruption-free environment; and the boy can snap out of his disruptive behavior and study with the other students.Then, as an example of your first point that I just refuted, you brought up the example of "a girl from Texas who got spanked…and had bruises." You listed cnn.com as your reference. That being a rather large website, I believe we can agree that it would be somewhat unreasonable for me to have to comb through the website to find the exact information you intend to convey. However, I thought I'd take the time for you to find what I believe is your source, or at least, the same story. (Source 2) In the story, the mother is upset that her child was spanked at school, and I do sympathize with her, but you've presented a gross oversimplification.First, the mother was not upset that her child was spanked; she was upset that her child was spanked by a male instructor. The school policy was that "females swatted females, and males swatted males." Had a female instructor spanked her with appropriate strength, this would not have been an issue, because 1.) it would have been in line with school policy, and 2.) it would have been with sufficient strength for the misdeed the girl committed (more on the "misdeed" later). Nowhere does the mother disagree with corporal punishment; in fact, she wants it enforced and controlled. "Men are too big and strong to be hitting 96-pound girls," she says. As you stated earlier, parents have the choice of whether to spank their children, correct? This mother wants her child spanked, but she wants it done in an appropriate manner by a third party. She knowingly put her daughter in this school because it had the rules and environment that she deemed appropriate. You can't take away the mother's right to choose a school she believes is right for her daughter.Now, about the "misdeed" I mentioned earlier. The girl wasn't just minding her own business when the teacher walked up and spanked her; she was "letting another student copy her work." In many schools, this can get a student expelled. Students should not be denied education, because that only leads to crime (Source 3), which, I believe, you'll agree is a bad thing. If a spanking can keep a student in school and allow her to understand her wrongdoings to avoid doing them again, there is no reason not to continue to do so in schools. Which is less acceptable to you--a child who becomes more likely to commit crimes and leads a terrible life because she was expelled from school, or a child who suffered a few bruises on her bottom but grows up with a full education and becomes successful in later years?Finally, your last sentence: "Spanking is not the best in general but definitely not in schools." This wasn't entirely clear to me, but my best guess is that you intended to say that "spanking is not the best form of punishment, and it therefore does not belong in schools." If this is the case, you are saying that spanking is an effective form of punishment to some degree, but it does not belong in schools. Spanking is not the best, but it does work somewhat. In that case, why take it away? Schools should have a variety of methods to encourage students to cooperate with teachers and learn the material; why limit them arbitrarily? Corporal punishment is fast and can be done on the spot. These conditions make it a better deterrent than anything that forces students to wait a few weeks before being punished. (Source 4) It's similar to why a dog should be punished for pooping in the house as soon as possible; it will have no idea what it is being punished for if you wait a week to do it. Do you like dogs? I love dogs, but if one needs to be punished, I wouldn't hesitate to. An unpunished dog bites, pees everywhere, and is generally unruly.Children won't forget like dogs do, but it does become more difficult for them to understand their misdeed if they are not punished as soon as they are caught. Any child psychologist or educator can tell you that in a few weeks, a child simply won't care about what happened after what seems like ages to their young minds. Therefore, spanking is a form of punishment and a deterrent that should not be taken away from schools as an option to discipline children.Your move.Sources:1 http://en.wikipedia.org...2 http://www.dailymail.co.uk...3 http://www.all4ed.org...4 "Timing of Punishment as a Determinant of Response Inhibition," Child Development 34 (1963): 207-14

Title: Resolved: Parents ought not use corporal punishment to rear children Content: I thank ScarletGhost for the challenge, and gladly accept. I will be taking the con position, defending the use of corporal punishment, as defined below, by parents. In debate, it is important to have definitions and rules to properly outline the position taken by the participants, and how the debate will be conducted. Since none were provided, I'd like to offer the following definitions and rules. DefinitionsCorporal punishment: Spanking on the rear, or smacking the hand or behind of a child. A non-abusive punishment used by parents, designed to correct harmful behaviors in children who refuse, or are not able to process, logical commands (i. e. Don't stick your fingers in a light socket). Children: Youths, ages 0-18. Child-rearing: Parenting; providing a nurturing and constructive environment that promotes growth and development in a child or children. . http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...RulesVideos may be used, provided that enough commentary is provided to explain the purpose, and relevance to the argument. Videos are not mandatory, and neither participant should be penalized for not using a video. The final round will be used for rebuttal and summation only. No new arguments will be introduced. A forfeit of any round equals a forfeit of the debate.

Title: Corporal punishment Content: Pro, thank you for your organized arguments.CounterA spanking does work.You stated that spanking children distracts them from the "real goal". You stated that the child would focus on the punishment and not on the reason they were punished. Then you took a leap and made the claim that they will not consider it bad behavior because they focused on the punishment. I think the first thing that must be clarified is the age of the children we are discussing. I will tell you this; when children under go corporal punishment, they MUST focus on the reason they are being punished because the child will always wonder what they could have done differently to avoid being punished. Also, take classical conditioning into count. Because the child recognizes a negative sanction to be in order every time a specific action will be performed, the child learns to avoid performing said action. You also stated that corporal punishment causes children to become desensitized to violence. I disagree, and here's why: If a child never experiences violence, he can never fully understand it and therefore becomes desensitized to it himself. If a child experiences violence, he recognizes it as negative and views it negatively. Ergo, the level of violence exposed to a child through spanking help to build awareness and character. Take a look at the difference in our generations. The older generation that was raised with corporal punishment show more respect for the individual and society as opposed to the child today who is disrespectful because he knows he can get away with it. That's the key here, getting away with it. If a child learns quick that a negative punishment will follow the breaking of a rule, the child will learn quickly to change his actions.I think we all can agree that nothing works better than a good old fashioned spanking.

Title: For children, actions speak louder than words. Content: Children usually learn by observing role models and imitating them. Especially younger ones who do not fully understand the abstract moral concepts (empty words) behind the punishments, making them reliant to whoever the nearest role model is. Thus when you hit children very often they're at risk of thinking that morality only exists if you get caught/punished and if you're all grown up it's fine to hit smaller and powerless people. And corporal punishment does not work especially to those children who are too predisposed to violence and alienation, such as sociopaths. If anything you're just encouraging them on how to take their own personal grudges onto other people and justify them with empty words. I personally do not see a beneficial relation corporal punishment has with constructive parental modeling.

Title: Corporal punishment can be regulated within orderly framework. Content: Corporal punishment must be used as part of a wider strategy and at the correct time: when other immediate discipline has failed; when the child understands their behaviour and has had an opportunity to explain it; and after an initial warning and opportunity for the child to repent. Crucially, the person delivering the punishment must not be angry at the time. This undermines much of the hysterical argument against corporal punishment.

Title: It has been made illegal in so many countries for a reason. Content: Corporal Punishment has now been completely banned in 24 countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Latvia, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Ukraine, Uruguay and Venezuela. Furthermore, there are numerous countries which are on their way to banning it such as Italy and Nepal, who have forbidden it by the courts but not by law as of yet. Corporal punishment is becoming widely discussed all over the world and the consideration to completely ban it is becoming a frequent query. Therefore, corporal punishment should not be reintroduced as evidently the fact that so many countries are against it portrays the negativity it brings and the banning of it in so many countries must be for a good reason. If there were any doubts all these countries would not have banned it and the UK would not have banned it in schools in the first place! To reinstate something which has already been thoroughly discussed years ago and of which the outcome was negative, would be absurd!

Title: Spanking your children Content: Spanking is NOT a form of discipline, rather a form of punishment and should not be implicated upon children as it is more harmful than beneficial. 1. It teaches children that violence is the proper method to get their way 2. It causes children to be fearful 3. It teaches children that it is okay to react out of anger, as well as aggressive behaviours The more appropriate means to discipline a child would be delivering a response as opposed to a reaction. Giving a child rationale regarding their wrong behaviours will teach the proper lesson that is originally intended to be taught. Being hit as a child could imply many negative and harmful messages to the child that will effect them into adulthood whether it is conscious or subconscious.

Title: Corporal punishment of children Content: General statements in support of corporal punishment

Title: Corporal punishment in schools. Content: My support for corporal punishment in school rests on a single premise. There may be times even if rare when the use of the strap or other implement is necessary and beneficial.

Title: corporal punishment Content: In my opinion, corporal punishment is brutal and too severe a disciplinary action. Corporal punishment can often be very traumatic to the person it is inflicted upon. So much so that a child subjected to corporal punishment more often than not grows up to abuse physically not only his own family but other acquaintances as well. Thankfully, this practice has been banned in several nations and is a punishable offence in a few others. There are more humane ways of admonishing a child. Take for example grounding him or her. This leaves space for the juvenile to ruminate over his or her bad behaviour and even offers a chance for reformation. However, if a child is beaten up in order to drill in some moral lesson, there is a high chance the innocent will fall back on its lesson and commit a similar offence, leading to a vicious cycle. In summary, corporal punishment is detrimental to a child's overall growth and can impair his/her self-esteem and cause lasting damage.

Title: Corporal punishment in schools. Content: Let me begin by saying that you have no evidence to support your claim. Your entire argument (despite how small it is) it is based entirely on an opinion. If we are spouting opinions I do not think hitting someone is necessary. I believe other punishments can be found for the child other than causing physical pain. " even if rare" If it is a punishment is with rare benefits, than you should weigh the estimated 2230 children in need of medical attention in 2005 alone, the 2 that died, and however many more that are emotionally scared by corporal punishment experiences. http://centerforparentingeducation.org...... https://en.wikipedia.org...... http://www.cnn.com...... http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...... Society for Adolescent Medicine https://en.wikipedia.org...... https://en.wikipedia.org......

Title: Judicial Corporal Punishment (e.g. caning) should be made illegal. Content: Corporal punishment is unjustifiable and amounts to child- abuse because it is unjustifiable and amounts to child abuse as it degrades the child and lowers their self esteem. It is illegal for a reason and increase the rate of crime and violence. Also it could have psychological effects on the children and also is wrong and inappropriate, while also harming children with genuine behavioural disorders or other disabilities .It brings fear and hardens the victims and for children actions speak louder then words.