Everybody has different beliefs on rather children should be spanked, or if that is considered abuse. Their is a huge difference between spanking your child to show them what is right and wrong, and abusing them. Children have a more likely change to perform better later on in life if they get spanked at the appropriate time. I agree with some of the things bell hooks’ says, but disagree with how she views spanking. I believe that spanking can be a good tool as long as it is used correctly and only if all else has failed.
The correct way to administer a spanking is when it is ' '... ' 'two open-handed swats, not out of control due to anger ' ' as a backup for children between the ages of 2 and 6” (Goode). If you leave marks or bruises on the child, is becomes abuse, not only from my believes, but also from the California law. If you do anything other than softly hit their bottom, it could leave visible marks, which is illegal. You can not spank while you are angry or else you can hurt them. You are not
…show more content…
If you spank your child they have a better outcome later in life. “Those who were physically disciplined performed better than those who weren’t in a whole series of categories, including school grades, an optimistic outlook on life, the willingness to perform volunteer work, and the ambition to attend college...” (Kettle). Children who are shown what it right from wrong at a young age have more ambition, and want to do better in life. When your child is never disciplined, the child becomes rude, and has no respect for you. It becomes hard to raise a child who has no respect for you or any other adults. If you do not discipline early enough, they will not respond to it later. As long as you are doing it right, spanking can be a good way to teach your children. You just have to make sure to not cross over that line, and make it become abuse. When you spank your child you are making them respect you, they will not want to disobey you when they know the outcome will