A Critical Analysis of the Given Article

In the article, Why You Shouldn't Spank Your Child, the author, Adrian deals with the issue of whether
corporal punishment should be used to discipline children. He argues that corporal punishment should
not be used as a means to discipline children. Words such as outlawed, bloodlust, murderous impulses
and small and fragile reflect bias language through which his tone of disapproval and concern is
conveyed as he attempts to convince parents, teachers and those involved in bringing up children about
the negative impact that corporal punishment has on children.

He begins his case by stating that there are legal and moral arguments against corporal punishment, but
elaborates only on the moral perspective before presenting his own views on the topic. He makes
extensive reference to the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children website, and
other sources such as a UNESCO report (15 June, 2005) and http://www.corpun.com, a resource for
corporal punishment research that offer credibility to the moral argument which centres on the
infringement of the childrens rights and the negative consequences of corporal punishment. However,
there is a gap in his reasoning as he does not elaborate at all on the legal perspective. Moreover, there is
evidence that he has referred to blogs such as Wikipedia which are unreliable sources of information.

The claims made on moral grounds with respect to childrens rights are plausible as they state that
children should be treated with dignity as human beings, and that hitting them infringes on their basic
rights. There is a claim made for a constructive, non-violent form of child discipline that recognises the
rights of a child and understands child development. However, he offers no viable alternative. Instead,
he presents more claims that highlight the negative consequences of corporal punishment, namely

It only ensures short-term obedience.

It deteriorates into abuse with the increasing need for repeated punishment that requires more
force.

It erodes trust and respect between children and parents/teachers.

It causes psychological problems in children that will also affect them in the long term as an
adult.

Having said all this, the author immediately presents a counter-argument conceding that corporal
punishment will not necessarily result in the consequences mentioned earlier. He accepts that a child
wont necessarily turn into a vicious adult. In doing so, this argument against corporal punishment is
complete. Other counter-arguments such as:

Children need to be disciplined

Parents have the right to strike their children

 Children need to be smacked for safety

It's just a little slap

are deliberately worded so that they present corporal punishment in a negative light and are
subsequently challenged. Some of these refutations may be correct but they lack validity as there is no
external support such as research findings. Therefore, they appear merely as the authors opinions.

The author then presents three claims to support his own point of view on the issue. His first claim that
corporal punishment does not deter or rehabilitate a child echoes what has been mentioned earlier. The
increasing evidence to support this claim, however, is not provided. He simply states that its efficacy is
as debatable as the global warming issue, and leaves it to the readers stating that acceptance of his view
is a matter of which research they accept. The second claim hints of the authors own lack of conviction
about the negative effects of corporal punishment emerging in the future. The use of double negatives
suggests that the author has a few mental reservations about the argument. He mentions an expert,
David Benatar but does not present his view. Lastly, he argues that corporal punishment should not be
condoned by a civilized society for the purpose of retribution/revenge. No rational parent or teacher
would consider this option in administering corporal punishment.

The author generally appears to be inductive in his reasoning, as he provides all the specific support as
to why corporal punishment is unacceptable and attempts to generalize, for instance, claiming that any
punishment needs justification to be administered and that acceptance of the argument is based on
ones beliefs or principles. Paragraph XIV presents an example of inductive reasoning.

In summary, the authors first and second arguments appear to contradict each other, thus weakening
the authors stand that corporal punishment should not be used as a means to discipline children. His
last argument that parents and teachers impose corporal punishment as a means of retribution or
revenge is unacceptable. Although he managed to show some validity and credibility in some of the
earlier claims, his overall argument against corporal punishment is weak and unsound due to lack of
strong support.

751 words

Note:

This is just one way of analysing the given article. Students need to justify their interpretation and
analysis of a given article with examples.