[Dottie]

Originally Posted by DarthMarth

I have had both of these punishments used against me(more recent than some of you may be thinking) and I believe they are not very helpful.

Originally Posted by sinbad71

Having been on the receiving end of a few well deserved spankings in my time, it has given me a a very clear definition of whats wrong and whats right.

Are there any particular reason you believe that you perception of your own upbringing is representative, or even accurate? I can just as well claim I've never been spanked and have grown up to be mother Theresa. Anecdotes have very little value when it comes to determine causality of anything.

Also, physical punishment has worked for thousands of years, why fix it if it ain't broken? especially in light of such recent events at certain schools...

I don't know if that was meant seriously or not, but that a behaviour have been in practice for a long time is obviously not an indication of it's desirability, as I'm sure you agree.

Regarding the effects of spanking APA has, as usual , made information about it available for free, and in full.

Summary:
Is Corporal Punishment An Effective Means Of Discipline?

Article:
http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/bul1284539.pdf

As you can see, this suggest that corporal punishment is in fact broken.

Spanking may cause "psychological damage" and that's exactly what they need: a change in mindset.

And still, data suggests corporal punishment does much to change a child's immediate behaviour but does not change their mindset.

Originally Posted by Article above

Moral Internalization
Although immediate compliance may be a salient goal when
parents initiate discipline, promoting the development of children’s
internal controls is more important to long-term socialization
than immediate compliance (Grolnick, Deci, & Ryan, 1997;
Hoffman, 1983; Kohlberg, 1969; Lepper, 1983; Piaget, 1932/
1965). Moral internalization is defined by Grusec and Goodnow
(1994) as “taking over the values and attitudes of society as one’s
own so that socially acceptable behavior is motivated not by
anticipation of external consequences but by intrinsic or internal
factors” (p. 4), and it is thought to underlie the development of
children’s social and emotional competence (Kochanska &
Thompson, 1997). Children’s internalization of morals is thought
to be enhanced by parental discipline strategies that use minimal
parental power, promote choice and autonomy, and provide explanations
for desirable behaviors (Kuczynski & Hildebrandt, 1997).
Attribution theorists emphasize that power-assertive methods suchas corporal punishment promote children’s external attributions for their behavior and minimize their attributions to internal motivations
(Dix & Grusec, 1983; Hoffman, 1983; Lepper, 1983). Additionally,
corporal punishment may not facilitate moral internalization
because it does not teach children the reasons for behaving
correctly, does not involve communication of the effects of children’s
behaviors on others, and may teach children the desirability
of not getting caught (Hoffman, 1983; Grusec, 1983; Smetana,
1997).

@Curdis: Surely, when people talk about corporal punishment they refer to inflicting physical pain? If used in that sense restraining would not qualify.