Spanking It's Bad For All Kids By Narvaez Summary

The Disadvantages of Spanking: Rhetorical Analysis

Darcia Narvaez’s article “Research on Spanking: It’s Bad for ALL Kids” argues the negative effects of spanking any child. She brings light to a long standing form of parenting that has recently been proven more detrimental than beneficial. She argues that spanking any child is not only ineffective in deterring undesirable behaviors, but also damaging to any child. She argues, that spanking can cause an increase aggression in children among other undesirable behaviors. She states that spanking not only has lasting damages with the parent-child relationship, but can also lead to an increase in undesirable behaviors. Darcia Narvaez’s arguments presented are does not rely heavily on pathos, and instead uses logos.

Darcia begins her writing by first defining spanking as “hitting a child on the bottom with an open hand.” She then illustrates situations in which many parents may warrant the need for spanking. She follows with multiple examples of the negative effects of corporal punishment on the developing children ranging from increased aggression in retaliation to lack of trust

between the child and parent ultimately leading to children fearing punishment. She also links to an increase in delinquency and oftentimes criminal behaviors.
In the article, Darcia’s claims are heavily directed at logos.

She uses logos when she acknowledges that few studies have been done due to the prohibition against hurting subjects in case studies. She does however cite the few studies done that analyze children’s reactions to different forms of punishments including spanking and time outs. The studies cited indicate that spanking decreases long-term compliance. She appeals to logos when suggesting approaching the subject from a behaviorist perspective and outlines how conditioning by punishment or pain requires consequences to immediately follow the action after every occurrence. Examples such as being burned after touching a hot stove, or stepping on something sharp when not wearing shoes. With the delayed punishment, children are unable to be conditioned accordingly to the

punishment.
Although the majority of the article is directed at the logos, Darcia does provide a few pathos undertones. Without the proper connection between action and punishment, recidivism is guaranteed. Since spanking is not positive guidance, that can only be learned from practicing actions that work, spanking has no effect on increased desirable behaviors. She appeals to logos when suggest that spanking undermines the trust a child has in their parents and thus causes a child to step back from that relationship and put up a metaphorical shield up. The author requests the acknowledgement of an increased likelihood of the children growing up to be physically abused after experiencing physical punishments at a young age. Despite the use of ethos in this circumstance, she uses logos by means of cited studies to support her claim.
The author avoided logical fallacies by intentionally ruling out the genetic fallacy. She provides a direct study proving that spanking increases aggression in all children, no matter the ethnicity or culture. Although this specific section of the article seems out of place, it prevents a racism and supports uniformity across the board.
Ultimately, Darcia Narvaez’s position is sound. She relies heavily on logos to support her stance and deliberately rules out possible counter arguments with her removal of the genetic fallacy. Her brief use of ethos is backed by logos and thus maintains consistency throughout. By avoiding heavy use of ethos and logical fallacies, the article is justifiable and reasonable. Her writing is effective and well cited; the work is direct, insightful, and honest.