A Massachusetts court ruled Thursday that parents cannot be held criminally liable for spanking their children as long as they use “reasonable” force and don’t cause kids physical harm or mental distress. Still, experts say that even though spanking may be permissible, it’s not advisable.
In its ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court overturned the conviction of a dad who publicly spanked his daughter in 2011. At the time, the little girl was almost 3 years old. In their decision, the justices said that spanking “remains firmly woven into our nation’s social fabric” and “it follows that we must guard against the imposition of criminal sanctions for the use of parenting techniques still widely regarded as permissible and warranted.”A Massachusetts court ruled Thursday that parents cannot be held criminally liable for spanking their children as long as they use “reasonable” force and don’t cause kids physical harm or mental distress. Still, experts say that even though spanking may be permissible, it’s not advisable.
In its ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court overturned the conviction of a dad who publicly spanked his daughter in 2011. At the time, the little girl was almost 3 years old. In their decision, the justices said that spanking “remains firmly woven into our nation’s social fabric” and “it follows that we must guard against the imposition of criminal sanctions for the use of parenting techniques still widely regarded as permissible and warranted.”
STORY: To Spank or Not to Spank? That Is the Question
But the court was clear that when the distinction between discipline and abuse is blurry, priority will be given to the child’s safety. “The balance will tip in favor of the protection of children,” the decision said.
Still, experts say that the effects of spanking go directly against what the court is promoting. The decision held that use of force must be “reasonably related to the purpose of safeguarding or promoting the welfare of the minor,” but Deborah Gilboa, a parenting expert and family physician, says spanking does neither. “Parents intend it that way, but research doesn’t find safeguarding or promotion of welfare as an outcome of spanking,” she tells Yahoo Parenting. “It undermines your role as the safest person for your child to talk to or be with. It undermines the lesson that we don’t hit to get what we want. Intentionally causing someone else physical pain is counter to most of the messages that we know kids need to hear.”
But the court was clear that when the distinction between discipline and abuse is blurry, priority will be given to the child’s safety. “The balance will tip in favor of the protection of children,” the decision said.
Still, experts say that the effects of spanking go directly against what the court is promoting. The decision held that use of force must be “reasonably related to the purpose of safeguarding or promoting the welfare of the minor,” but Deborah Gilboa, a parenting expert and family physician, says spanking does neither. “Parents intend it that way, but research doesn’t find safeguarding or promotion of welfare as an outcome of spanking,” she tells Yahoo Parenting. “It undermines your role as the safest person for your child to talk to or be with. It undermines the lesson that we don’t hit to get what we want. Intentionally causing someone else physical pain is counter to most of the messages that we know kids need to hear.”
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by angelatc
Connect With Us