To Spank Or Not To Spank: What The Evidence Says

As parents, our patience is often tested by our kids, especially when they behave inappropriately. But should parents spank children to discipline them? Find out what the effects of spanking your children can be.

Half our readers say they’ll smack their children, so this isn’t a fringe position and there’s no point being preachy about it. But it’s worth being accurate about what the evidence shows, because the finding is unusually one-directional.

“Do you / will you spank your child?” 2,788 votes: 51% yes, 28% no, 22% undecided.

“Is it okay to cane your child?” 2,962 votes: 54% depends on the situation, 31% no, 15% yes.

What the research finds

This has been studied extensively, across decades and cultures, including in Asian populations. The consistent findings:

Physical punishment is associated with more aggression, not less, including aggression towards other children.
It’s associated with poorer mental health outcomes and a weaker parent-child relationship.
It doesn’t improve long-term compliance. Children who are smacked aren’t better behaved a year later.
No study has found a lasting benefit. That’s the part to sit with: researchers have looked for one, and the debate is about how strong the harm is, not whether there’s an upside.

Two caveats. Much of this is observational, so causation is argued over. Difficult children may attract more punishment as well as the reverse. And a single smack from a loving parent isn’t the same as habitual harsh punishment, and the research doesn’t claim it is.

But the practical conclusion holds either way: there’s no demonstrated benefit, so even on the most cautious reading of the evidence, there’s nothing being gained.

Why it persists anyway

Because it works, in the next four seconds. The behaviour stops, immediately, which rewards the parent and makes it more likely next time. That short-term effectiveness is exactly why a practice with no long-term benefit is so durable.

The trap follows from it: what works has to escalate. A child habituates, the smack that worked at three doesn’t work at five, and parents who rely on it find themselves needing more force to get the same result. Most parents who have gone further than they intended describe that trajectory.

“I was smacked and I’m fine”

Almost certainly true, and it doesn’t establish what it’s used to establish. Most people who were smacked are fine. Most people who weren’t smacked are also fine, and the question is whether it helped, not whether you survived it.

The better question: what specifically did it teach you, and would you’ve learned that another way?

The consequence people don’t consider

A child who expects a physical consequence weighs that against telling you things.

That isn’t a moral argument; it’s arithmetic a seven-year-old can do. And it counts most in exactly the situations you’d most want to hear about: a stranger messaging them, an adult behaving oddly, something they were talked into, a mistake that has become serious.

The children who report those are the ones who are confident of the reception.

What to use instead

Not permissiveness. The alternative to smacking isn’t fewer limits: it’s limits enforced differently.

Consistency beats severity. A small consequence that happens every time works better than a large one that happens sometimes. This is the single most useful finding in the whole area.
Natural and logical consequences. Throws the toy, toy goes away. Refuses to wear shoes, doesn’t go to the park.
Time-out, done properly: 85% of our readers already think it works. Roughly one minute per year of age, somewhere boring, no lecture during it, and straight back to the activity afterwards. The mistake is talking throughout, which turns it into attention.
Remove a privilege, briefly and specifically, not for a week.
Praise the opposite behaviour when it happens. Children get far more attention for what goes wrong, and reversing that ratio changes more than any consequence.
Prevent the predictable. Most bad behaviour in young children is hunger, tiredness, overstimulation or an abrupt transition. Fixing those removes the occasion entirely.
Name the feeling, hold the limit. “You’re furious. We’re still leaving.” Both halves.

If you’ve lost your temper

Most parents have, and shame doesn’t help here.

Repair it. “I shouldn’t have hit you. I was angry and I got it wrong. I’m sorry.” That costs no authority and teaches something valuable.
Work out the pattern. It’s usually the same time of day, the same trigger, the same level of exhaustion. That’s addressable.
Walk away first. Put the child somewhere safe and leave the room. Always available, and always better.
Get help if it’s happening often or getting harder to stop. Family Service Centres run parenting support across Singapore, and asking isn’t an admission of anything.

Absolute lines, whatever your view on smacking: never shake a child, never strike the head or face, never hit with an object, and never discipline while you’re out of control. If it leaves a mark, it’s gone past discipline.

If you’re worried about a child’s safety, the National Anti-Violence and Sexual Harassment Helpline is 1800-777-0000.

The position in Singapore

Reasonable physical discipline by a parent isn’t in itself unlawful here, and Singapore hasn’t banned smacking as some countries have. Causing injury to a child is a different matter and is a criminal offence.

Whatever the legal line, it’s a floor, not guidance. The question of what works is separate from the question of what’s permitted.

Frequently asked questions

Does smacking work?

In the immediate moment, yes, so it persists, because the behaviour stopping rewards the parent. Over the longer term, no: children who are smacked aren’t better behaved a year later, and no study has found a lasting benefit.

What does the research show?

Consistent associations with more aggression, not less, poorer mental health outcomes, and a weaker parent-child relationship. Much of it is observational so causation is debated, but researchers have looked for a benefit and not found one. So on any reading there’s nothing being gained.

I was smacked and I turned out fine. Doesn’t that count?

Most people who were smacked are fine, and most who weren’t are also fine. The question is whether it helped, not whether you survived it, and ask yourself what specifically it taught you, and whether you’d have learned that another way.

What works instead?

Consistency over severity: a small consequence every time beats a large one sometimes. Then natural and logical consequences, time-out done properly at roughly a minute per year of age with no lecture, brief specific removal of a privilege, praising the opposite behaviour, and preventing the predictable triggers of hunger, tiredness and abrupt transitions.

Why does smacking tend to escalate?

Because children habituate. What worked at three doesn’t work at five, so parents relying on it need more force for the same result. That’s the trajectory most people who went further than they intended describe.

What if I’ve already lost my temper?

Repair it: “I shouldn’t have hit you, I was angry and I got it wrong, I’m sorry.” That costs no authority. Then look for the pattern, which is usually the same time of day and level of exhaustion. If it’s happening often, Family Service Centres run parenting support and asking isn’t an admission of anything.

What to remember

It works for four seconds, so it survives. Nobody has found a long-term benefit, and the associations all run the other way.

It also escalates, because children habituate to it.

Consistency beats severity. A small consequence every time does more than a large one sometimes.

And a child who expects to be hit weighs that against telling you things, which matters most in the situations you’d most want to hear about.