Indeed, I noticed that on the first pass that the only one study which said contrary to the rest of the reports was from a Christian school.
The "Spare the rod, spoil the child" aspect was my first assumption.
I'm still waiting for the pro hitting advocates to give me a rational reason why they are willing to utilise physical punitive measures to control behaviour when firstly- a vast majority of the studies display it's actually detrimental overall - coupled with the question as to why they are willing to actively utilise the tool of physical punishment when there is virtually no evidence at all to support it's use.
Why on earth would somebody need concrete 100% certain evidence to stop doing something, but absolutely none to start?.
Im not unwilling to not smack my child. When I have children I will do my upmost to not have to resort to that. After all, what parent really wants to hit their child? I just accept that there could quite possibly come a circumstance where a smack is needed, and I will cross that bridge when I do. I just don't feel you have failed as a parent, or you are abusing your child if you do smack them as a last resort.
