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 305
D. “Risk . . . Alone Is Insufficient to Support Regulation” 338 Because “It
Is Always a Doubtful Course, to Argue Against the Use or
Existence of a Power, from the Possibility of Its Abuse” 339
When the research of spanking opponents is challenged, they often
claim they are only trying to expose “risk.” 340 For example, Dr.
Penelope Leach of London’s Royal Free Hospital admits that “no single
variable such as physical punishment would be expected to account for
all the variance in the outcomes of upbringing.” 341 Nevertheless, she
insists that “[t]he relevant concept is risk, and explaining risk is part of
government’s role.” 342
That’s as logical as saying it’s the government’s job to explain the
risk that cutting potatoes with knives may lead to stabbings. Statements
like Dr. Leach’s are generally unsupported by the sound research
because such research suggests that the risk of abuse lies in the parenting
style, not the discipline method. 343 Just as most people handle knives
responsibly, most parents spank responsibly. 344
338. FEC v. Beaumont, 539 U.S. 146, 159-60 n.5 (2003) (citing Austin v. Mich. Chamber of
Commerce, 494 U.S. 652, 658-59 (1990).
339. Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. 304, 344 (1816) (also saying, “From the very nature
of things, the absolute right of decision, in the last resort, must rest somewhere—wherever it may be
vested it is susceptible of abuse.”).
340. See U.N., League Table, supra note 7, at 30 (“Penelope Leach, Senior Research Fellow at
London’s Royal Free Hospital and University College Medical School and an anti-physical
punishment campaigner has written: ‘Concepts such as statistical significance, correlation,
prediction or risk are difficult to present comprehensibly in the brief and simple terms demanded by
the media . . . . [T]he relevant concept is risk . . . .’”).
341. Id. (Dr. Leach saying, “It is difficult to explain, briefly, that no single variable such as
physical punishment would be expected to account for all the variance in the outcomes of
upbringing; that nobody is suggesting that every smack leads to antisocial behaviour any more than
every cigarette leads to lung cancer, or even that everybody who is beaten a great deal is certain to
show later ill effects any more than everybody who smokes a great deal is certain to get lung
disease.”).
342. Id. (quoting Dr. Leach).
343. See, e.g., supra note 301 and accompanying text.
344. See, e.g., Rebecca R. S. Socolar, M.D & Ruth E. K. Stein, M.D. Spanking Infants and
Toddlers: Maternal Belief and Practice. 95 PEDIATRICS (1995) 105-111 (indicating “that most
parents who spank do not spank on impulse, but purposefully spank their children with a belief in its
effectiveness. Furthermore, the study revealed no significant correlation between the frequency of
spanking and the anger reported by mothers. Actually, the mothers who reported being angry were
not the same parents who spanked.”); supra note 210-212 and accompanying text.