The Science and Statistics Behind Spanking Suggests that

11-FULLER_FINAL_AFTERPROOF.DOC 2/17/2009 8:50 AM
2009] THE SCIENCE AND STATISTICS BEHIND SPANKING 263
school.” 92 At the same time, many Americans think “lack of discipline”
has become the biggest problem in public education. 93
While physical discipline has been going extinct in schools, it has
also been abolished in virtually every institution, daycare facility, and
foster home throughout the country. 94 Social workers are even being
trained to think that spanking in the home is harmful and should be
stopped. 95 They are being taught to advocate against physical discipline
both publicly and on private home visits. 96
92. See, e.g., Most Say Spanking’s OK by Parents But Not by Grade-School Teachers, ABC
NEWS, Nov. 8, 2002, available at http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/903a1Spanking.pdf.
93. See, e.g., School Poll, THE WASHINGTON TIMES, Aug. 28, 1995, at A-2.
94. See, e.g., EPOCH-USA, U.S. Progress in Ending Physical Punishment of Children in
Schools, Institutions, Foster Care, Day Care and Families, July 2008, available at
http://www.stophitting.com/index.php?page=statelegislation (saying physical discipline is banned
by law or regulation in the family day cares of forty-seven states, general day cares of forty-eight
states, group homes and institutions of forty-four states, and foster homes of forty-nine states); CAL.
HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 1531.5 (West 1986); IOWA CODE § 234.40 (West 1992); KY. REV.
STAT. ANN. § 199.896(18) (West 1987); N.C. GEN. STAT. § 110-101.1 (West 1997); JAMES W.
TRENT JR., INVENTING THE FEEBLE MIND 118 (1995) (“By 1910, most other superintendents also
opposed corporal punishment . . . . [A] director of research, Henry H. Goddard, had insisted: ‘In
this Institution the slightest approach to corporal punishment is followed by immediate
dismissal.’”).
95. See, e.g., RICHARD P. BARTH, JILL DUERR BERRICK & NEIL GILBERT, CHILD WELFARE
RESEARCH REVIEW 49-50 (1994) (“[T]he National Association of Social Workers has openly taken
a firm position against parental use of physical punishment, declaring that all physical punishment
of children has some harmful effects and should be stopped (NASW 1989).”); MYLES J. KELLEHER,
SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN A FREE SOCIETY 124 (2004) (“Today’s legal definition of ‘physical abuse’
covers the gamut of actions from the original concern over battering or ‘beating up’ children to
corporal punishment, and even spankings that result in reddening of the buttocks.”).
96. Compare, e.g., supra note 95 and accompanying text (showing that social workers are
taught that spanking is wrong), and HELPING IN CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES: A COMPETENCY-
BASED CASEWORK HANDBOOK 519 (Charmaine R. Brittain, MSW, PhD & Deborah Esquibel Hunt,
LCSW, PhD eds., 2004) (“Some abusing parents mistakenly believe that corporal punishment is the
only way to discipline children, and some child development specialists believe that almost all
parents must occasionally resort to corporal punishment to discipline or train children. Other
professionals believe that corporal punishment is never advisable.”), with ALFRED KADUSHIN &
GOLDIE KADUSHIN, INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL FOR THE SOCIAL WORK INTERVIEW 26 (4th ed. 1997)
(“You are a worker in a protective service unit. In response to a report of child abuse you are
visiting a family of immigrants. The mother readily admits that she has used a belt to discipline her
5-year-old son. She says that she is following the teacher of her culture that says, ‘You have to use
corporal punishment if you expect a child to grow up straight.’ What would you say?” The manual
leaves the answer open for class discussion.), and MARY EDNA HELFER, RUTH S. KEMPE &
RICHARD D. KRUGMAN, THE BATTERED CHILD 579 (5th ed. 1999) (saying their “[p]rimary” means
of preventing child abuse comprises “[e]fforts aimed at whole population groups, addressing the
underlying or societal causes of child abuse (for example . . . acceptance of corporal punishment as
a form of discipline . . .”) (emphasis in original).