Spanking Lowers I.Q.
Friday, September 25th, 2009Well, that will disappoint some of the readers here. Oh wait! Not that kind of spanking. Here’s the study:
The results of a survey of more than 17,000 university students from 32 countries “show that the higher the percent of parents who used corporal punishment, the lower the national average IQ,” Straus wrote in his presentation.
In looking at spanking just in the United States, Straus and a fellow researcher reviewed data on IQ scores from 806 children between 2 and 4 years old and another 704 kids aged 5 to 9.
When their IQs were tested again four years later, children in the younger group who were not spanked scored five points higher, on average, than did children who had been spanked. In the group of older children, spanking resulted in an average loss of 2.8 points.
“How often parents spanked made a difference,” Straus said in a news release from the university. “The more spanking, the slower the development of the child’s mental ability. But even small amounts of spanking made a difference.”
I think the study writers were beaten as children.
First, when looking across cultures, how does one control for something like spanking? All Australian children eat vegemite, or however you spell it. Does that make an IQ difference? Do spanked children who eat vegemite have higher or lower IQs?
Not to mention, this statement, an obvious one, invalidates the whole study:
Those findings are plausible and make some sense, Briggs said, but she added that it’s difficult to tease out all the other factors that could play a role in IQ scores — including poverty and parental education.
Ya think? How about the parents being morons themselves since IQ is highly heritable?
Second, the presumption is that spanking a child is an out-of-control parenting experience:
Dr. Stephen Ajl, a child abuse pediatrician, director of pediatric ambulatory care at the Brooklyn Hospital Center and medical director of the Jane Barker Brooklyn Children’s Advocacy Center in New York City, said that “spanking and other forms of corporal punishment mean that someone has lost control, and if that goes on on a chronic basis, it may affect some part of children’s psychological well-being.”
And though some people believe that they can use spanking as a form of punishment without losing control, Briggs said that’s very difficult to do all the time.
“When you’re physical with your child, you open that floodgate, and the likelihood that it could veer into where you don’t have as much control increases,” Briggs said. “Plus, if you’re just spanking, you haven’t taught your child anything.”
You can’t tell me the culture of beating a kid with a stick for every response is the same as a parent who spanks a kid for running into the street. Even if the second parent is out-of-control or angry, sometimes it’s not bad for a kid to get “rebooted” now and again.
This study was put forth for political reasons. Liberals don’t like spanking. They think it’s barbaric. They also believe everyone can be rehabilitated. Ironically, the children who never learn consequences as a kid grows up to being surprised, and in jail, dealing with consequences.
Can a child grow up without ever being spanked and turn out fine? Yes. Can a child receive corporal punishment and turn out fine? Yes. The bigger thing is love being the foundation.
Also: Spanking is NOT hitting. There is a huge difference between the two. Beating is another whole level of abuse. Liberals like conflating these things because nuance scares them. They want a rule for parents to follow, but the fact is, every child is different. Family personalities are different. Parents must make different choices with different kids.
Bottom line, libs need to butt out.
Aggressive Schooling
Wednesday, April 8th, 2009There have been all sorts of articles written about Helicopter Parents and now, there’s a new trend called “slow parenting“. Slow parenting is just as the name implies–yank your kids out of activities and slow down. There is competing evidence, like came from Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers that kids do better with more activities and need at least ten years of consistent, hard work to achieve mastery. And then, there was his extolling of the schools that go year around and for eight hours a day, including Saturday.
Slow parenting might be a new trend, though I’m dubious. Aggressive, strung-out parenting seems to be the norm. Kids have their extra-curricular activities and then they come home…where they are the victims of aggressive schooling.
All the parents complain about aggressive schooling and then, they comply. Their kids come home with projects beyond their ability and the parents are forced to “help” or else the child will be consigned to B+ status.
There is a method to the schooling madness. By making every piece of homework a little too difficult and a must-check and sign by parents, teachers off-load responsibility. If the kid is uneducated, it’s not the teacher’s fault, the parents just don’t care enough and aren’t involved.
Beyond the state’s control of the individual’s behavior, is there any evidence that front-loading education accomplishes anything besides making kids tired and frustrated with school?
And while kids seem to know more minutiae do they have the context to put this information in?
My concern is practical–kids are tired, worn-out and have less time to just play. My concern is also scientific. It seems that there should be evidence that these methods actually work. Children are scheduled heavily and working evenings and weekends when the time could be spent doing other things. Does this work pay off? What are the outcomes to this approach?
If SAT scores mean anything, education has declined, not improved. From the Wall Street Journal:
High-school students’ performance on SAT college-entrance exams stalled, and the gap widened between low-scoring minority groups and the overall population, raising questions about the quality of teaching in U.S. schools.
There should be evidence that broad academic front-loading is helpful and effective. If not, kids need to be cut a break. They have their whole lives to learn taxonomy, but there are only a few years to play.
Ignorant Boys + Slutty Girls = A Bright Future
Monday, March 30th, 2009On the same day I read (via Instapundit) that British boys are keeping themselves stupid so as not to get their dumb asses kicked by even dumber, and ostensibly bigger and stronger, bullies, I read that girls are checking out porn, giving boyfriends a show via webcam and sending naked pictures of themselves to the aforementioned willful idiots.
This is the future: hyper-sexualized ignoramuses. The worst part? They won’t know anything, but they’ll know how to creatively copulate and procreate.
The Angry Rant
Wednesday, February 18th, 2009Stupid Parents
Who buys dirt bike boots for a two year old?
A 12 Year Old Speaks On Abortion, But Should She?
Wednesday, February 11th, 2009My friend and fellow blogger pointed me in the direction of this video by a 12 year old girl explaining her opposition to abortion. It looks like a school project where she either practiced using the video equipment or turned in her project on video. Go watch it and then come back.
While the content of the girl’s argument is sound and I personally agree with her perspective, my meta issue is the fact that she’s 12, a child herself. The video crawled all over me as a parent. Just as the kids made to sing Obama songs, pay fealty to Obama’s image in school, or in my daughter’s case, come home with homework that required her to describe a change she was going to make (this was a ready-made work-sheet by the way) in honor of Barack Obama’s presidential win, exploits a child ideologically, having a child discuss abortion and then post it on the internet seems…wrong.
A child under the age of 18 cannot enter a contract because he is not “of age”. That is, a person entering a contract must understand the provisions in the contract in order to be held to it. Likewise, a 12 year old child may have the moral clarity to feel a certain way about a topic, but does he have the understanding to comprehend the long-term consequences of having those opinions aired publicly?
This is, no doubt, a gray area. I immediately call to mind child actors, musicians, etc. Children can be mature and wise and change the world for the positive. Lots of kids have started charities, written books, etc.
What do you think?
Agent Bedhead
Monday, February 9th, 2009Coraline: A Movie Review
Neil Gaimon’s always scary stories made into a movie.
Are You Uglier Than A 5th Grader?
Tuesday, December 16th, 2008‘Tis the season of school concerts and behold the cherubic angels sing and play bells and perform vague “winter” music. But I’m not going to talk about political correctness run amok in our schools. No, today, I’m going to talk about the ugliest year in school–the year we all look back on with regret.
Fifth grade is ugly.
There were over fifty kids gathered last night. Individually, the kids are cute in an awkward, pot-bellied, big-pawed puppy sort of way. Collectively, the effect is hideous.
Teeth are too big for heads. Boys don’t care about personal hygiene and they are in serious need of some. Hormones are making bodies bulgy in all sorts of places. Girls are heads and shoulders taller than the boys. Some boys are midgets. Some look like short men. Kids are still coerced by parents, or just don’t care very much, about pants that are too short, hair that’s too straggly and long, glasses that are too big for the face, and shoes that don’t go with the clothes. Fifth grade is a fashion disaster.
And I’m not casting any stones here. I wish I could find the picture so I could scan it and show you people what I looked like in 5th grade. I’ll try to describe it. First, mom put me in a brown plaid shirt–you know, because plaid looks so good in pictures. I think I might have worn one of those bolo ties that were popular in the day. (Who could forget the leather vest stage? You know you had one.) Then there were the big man glasses. Those were awesome. They were the glasses that came with the insurance plan, don’t you know, and looked great on boys AND girls. They were straight across the top and too big with rounded bottoms. Did I mention that I carried a violin case everywhere?
There is a saving grace. In fifth grade, there still seems to be a measure of ignorant bliss. That is, the lack of self-awareness confers happiness. By seventh grade, a kid becomes aware and therefore miserable and that’s kinda sad. Wouldn’t it be great to hold on to nerdy selves and embrace it and not go through thirty years of angst trying to be something we’re not, only to come back around to who we were to begin with? It’s not like our essence changes, but we do try to package ourselves for public consumption–and let’s face it, to mate and be mate-worthy.
5th grade might be ugly, but its the beauty of the age that really makes grown-ups mourn.
Generation Y: Self-Involved, Over-Indulged Babies
Monday, December 8th, 2008Generation Y: Self-Involved, Over-Indulged Babies
Pain in the arse co-workers, I say.
“I just want my kids to be happy”
Monday, November 24th, 2008“I just want my kids to be happy”
How about this: “I just want my kids to be responsible and productive citizens and if they’re happy that’s a nice side benefit.”
