Search

Objective: The objective was to examine the roles of cognition and affect in maternal use of physical punishment. Method: Through a review of the literature, distal and proximal predictors (cognitive and affective) of physical punishment use were identified. One hundred and ten mothers of 3-year-old children were interviewed regarding two disciplinary situations that occurred during the previous 2-week period that elicited their strongest reactions: one which resulted in the use of physical punishment (if this occurred) and one which did not. The individual and combined contributions of the predictors of physical punishment use were analyzed through logistic regression. Results: The predictors of physical punishment following individual analyses were: maternal attitude toward physical punishment, maternal perception of the seriousness and intent of the child misbehavior, and maternal anger in response to the child misbehavior. Through multivariate analysis 54% of the variance in physical punishment use was explained. Conclusions: Both cognitive and affective factors affect the decision to use physical punishment with children. These findings can be useful in establishing parenting educational programming that is directed at decreasing the rates of physical punishment and subsequently child physical abuse. Keywords: Punishment; Discipline; Abuse; Parenting; Children

Physical and emotional punishment of children is highly prevalent in the Asia-Pacific region. These actions predict a range of physical and emotional harms, prompting a worldwide effort to eliminate them. A key strategy in this effort is to change parental beliefs regarding the acceptability of physical and emotional punishment. The Positive Discipline in Everyday Parenting (PDEP) program was designed to change those beliefs by teaching parents about child development and strengthening their problem-solving skills. A sample of 377 parents in the Asia-Pacific region completed the program: 329 mothers and 47 fathers of children ranging in age from infancy to adolescence. The parents lived in Australia (n = 135), Japan (n = 172) or the Philippines (n = 70). In all three countries, parents' approval of punishment in general, and physical punishment specifically, declined and they became less likely to attribute typical child behavior to intentional misbehavior. By the end of the program, at least 75% of parents in each country felt better prepared to respond nonviolently to conflict with their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physical punishment of children is linked to negative developmental outcomes. The widely used Positive Parenting Program (Triple P) promotes alternative responses to physical punishment. Data on the effectiveness of the Triple P Seminar Series is limited. In this study, Canadian parents' reports of physical punishment, non-physical punishment, and non-punitive responses were compared before and after they attended the Triple P Seminar Series. Twenty-seven parents of children aged 2 to 6 years attended the Seminar Series and completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires measuring the number of times they used various physical punishments, non-physical punishments, and non-punitive responses in the past month. Hypotheses were tested using univariate descriptive analyses, paired samples t tests, and Wilcoxon Signed Rank Tests. Parents' reports of physical punishment decreased on only one of the four physical punishment items (shaking/grabbing) from pre- to post-intervention. Over the course of the Seminar Series, parents became more likely to emphasise rules and to punish their children by taking things away from them. The findings suggest that the Seminar Series has limited effectiveness in reducing physical punishments or increasing non-punitive responses. Further research on this question is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most physical violence against children is punitive in intent. The United Nations has called for the elimination of physical punishment of children and for the development of programs teaching nonviolent resolution of parent-child conflict. A focused effort is required to shift entrenched, intergenerationally transmitted, and culturally normalized belief systems about physical punishment. Positive Discipline in Everyday Parenting (PDEP ) was developed to meet this need. Its short-term objectives are to: 1) reduce approval of physical punishment; 2) normalize parent-child conflict; and 3) strengthen parenting self-efficacy. PDEP was delivered by trained program facilitators to 321 parents living in 14 cities in Canada. Responses to pre and posttest questionnaires suggest that parents who completed postprogram measures were less likely to both approve of physical punishment and view typical parent-child conflict as misbehaviour on the part of the child, and also to have greater parenting self-efficacy. More than 90% believed more strongly that parents should not use physical punishment, and that PDEP would help them control their anger and build stronger relationships with their children. PDEP is a promising approach to the prevention of punitive violence against children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined self-reported use of spanking as a discipline strategy in a Canadian sample of mothers and fathers (N = 2,340) of children aged 2 to 12 years using data from the International Parenting Survey–Canada. Logistic regression was conducted to assess the association between reported use of spanking and child characteristics (age, gender, disability status, and behaviour problems), adult demographic characteristics (age at birth of child, marital status, education, employment, and income inadequacy), as well as parent attitudes toward spanking. Approximately one quarter of parents reported spanking their child. Child age, parent education, employment, and income inadequacy had significant associations with reported spanking. When controlling for child and parent demographic characteristics, parent reports of child behaviour and parent attitudes toward spanking also had strong relationships with reported spanking. Results are discussed in relation to previous findings and in terms of implications for parenting interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]