Gradually the professional societies are changing their stance, convinced by the overwhelming scientific evidence. That will encourage more pediatricians, child development experts and therapists to officially adopt the zero tolerance position that eliminates the impasse that exists now on exactly how to define abuse. Current statutes are too loosly interpreted by the courts worldwide and there is never any accounting for the risk of depression or other mental problems. The message given parents must be unequivical. Never hit or humiliate a child for any reason.

Child rights advocates focus must shift to implementing needed cultural and political change. Like the laws against smoking that had such a demonstrable effect in helping smokers break the habit, a law against assaulting children will help many parents see that they really must reform. There is no legitimate reason to ever hit a vulnerable child for any circumstance.

CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE DISCIPLINE – online:
http://www.stophitting.com/index.php?page=poststatements

A Multi-pronged Approach to Ending Physical Punishment of Children in the United States

1. INDIVIDUALS HAVE A MORAL RESPONSIBILITY AND A ROLE IN ENDING PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT OF CHILDREN.
a. We must resolve not to hit our own children and to be knowledgeable about positive alternatives to physical punishment.
b. We should use terms that reflect the real nature of physical punishment like “hitting” rather than euphemisms like “swats” or “pops”.
c. In our professional roles, we should tell parents and caretakers not to hit children and provide alternatives.
d. We should support legal and educational reforms that lead to ending physical punishment of children.

2. EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ROLE IN ENDING PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT OF CHILDREN.
a. Teacher Education, Social Work, Criminal Justice, Counseling, Nursing, medical education and all human services programs should integrate knowledge about the negative effects of physical punishment and the benefits of positive alternatives into the curricula.
b. All professional organizations should have a position statement opposing the physical punishment of children and work for and support public policy and legal reform which leads to the elimination of physical punishment of children.

3. STATES AND COMMUNITIES HAVE A ROLE IN ENDING PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT OF CHILDREN.
a. Physical punishment in schools should be banned.
b. Programs on the negative effects of physical punishment and the benefits of positive alternatives should be part of required training for teachers, staff and students in public schools.
c. Programs on the negative effects of physical punishment and the benefits of positive alternatives should be available and accessible to all parents.
d. All professionals with mandated reporting responsibility for child abuse should have appropriate training in the negative effects of physical punishment of children and the benefits of positive alternatives.
e. State laws should be reformed to make it a misdemeanor to strike a child.

4. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN HELP END PHYSICAL PUNISHMENT OF CHILDREN.
a. The Senate should ratify the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.
b. The Surgeon General should establish a national blue ribbon task force on physical punishment of children and begin an educational campaign to end its use in all settings including homes.
c. Congress should require the prohibition of physical punishment in all laws regarding schools; foster care, institutional care and child care as a condition of federal funding.
d. All federally funded parent education programs should provide training on the negative effects of physical punishment and the benefits of positive alternatives.
e. Child abuse prevention grants should require that state programs focus activities on eliminating parental physical punishment of children and supporting positive alternatives.

-Adopted by the EPOCH-USA Advisory Board, June 2005.

Related articles

• Young human rights reporter of the year 2011 – lower secondary school runner up (guardian.co.uk)

No related posts.

Kathleen D. Vohs
Department of Marketing, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota,

Jonathan W. Schooler
Department of Psychology,

University of British Columbia

ABSTRACT—Does moral behavior draw on a belief in free will? Two experiments examined whether inducing participants to believe that human behavior is predetermined would encourage cheating. In Experiment 1, participants read either text that encouraged a belief in determinism (i.e., that portrayed behavior as the consequence of environmental and genetic factors) or neutral text. Exposure to the deterministic message increased cheating on a task  in which participants could passively allow a flawed computer program to reveal answers to mathematical problems that they had been instructed to solve themselves. Moreover, increased cheating behavior was mediated by decreased belief in free will. In Experiment 2, participants who read deterministic statements cheated by overpaying themselves for performance on a cognitive task; participants who read statements endorsing free will did not. These findings suggest that the debate over free will has societal, as well as scientific and theoretical, implications.

We are always ready to take refuge in a belief in determinism if this freedom weighs upon us or if we need an excuse. (Sartre, 1943/1956, pp. 78–79)

The belief that one determines one’s own outcomes is strong  and pervasive. In a massive survey of people in 36 countries, more than 70% agreed with the statement that their fate is in their own hands (International Social Survey Programme, 1998). Yet the view from the scientific community is that behavior is caused by genes underlying personality dispositions, brain mechanisms, or features of the environment (e.g., Bargh, in press; Crick, 1994; Pinker, 2002). There is reason to think that  scientists’ sentiment is spreading to nonscientists. For example, the news magazine The Economist recently ran the headline, ‘‘Free to Choose? Modern Neuroscience Is Eroding the Idea of Free Will’’ (‘‘Free to Choose?’’ 2006). What would happen if people came to believe that their behavior is the inexorable product of a causal chain set into motion without their own volition? Would people carry on, selves and behavior unperturbed, or, as Sartre suggested, might the adoption of a deterministic worldview serve as an excuse for untoward behaviors?

Full article is here:

Related articles

• The free will illusion illusion (psychologytoday.com)
• Findings: Do You Have Free Will? Yes, It’s the Only Choice (nytimes.com)
• Are Guys Who Don’t Believe in Free Will More Likely to Cheat? (marieclaire.com)
• Experimental Philosophy addresses Free Will vs. Determinism (mindblog.dericbownds.net)
• Does belief in free will lead to action? (eurekalert.org)
• Ask Not… “Is It Nature or Nurture?” Ask Instead: Is It… (psychologytoday.com)
• The psychology – and philosophy – of free will (cogsciblog.wordpress.com)
• This I Believe – A Deterministic World… (wainess.wordpress.com)
• Doubt About Free Will Ends at the Point Where My Fist Hits Your Nose: (brothersjuddblog.com)
• Do you have free will ? (room4truth.com)

No related posts.

Image via Wikipedia

MEDIA COVERAGE OF AND COMMENTARY ON GSP RESEARCH

ANALYSIS –

Gregory Paul on Religion
Domain-of-Darwin at Deviant Art blog 12/29/09

Are We Better Off Without Religion?
Susan Blackmore The Guardian 12/8/09

Who Needs God When We’ve Got Mammon?
David Villano Miller-McCune 11/24/09
[alternet.org article Is Religion Hurting America?]

Why Evolution is True
Jerry Coyne (University of Chicago) at Atheist Alliance International conference 10/3/09

[Minutes 41:00-48:00 & 54:00-57:00 are a practical demonstation of how GSP's research is beginning
to radically transform the evolution versus creation debate from the long static discussion about
science and education to the new, dynamic issue of scientifically and socioeconomically reforming the
U.S. to produce a better nation.)

Greg Paul Elaborates On Healthcare and Religion
Dorene Braun  Examiner 10/19/09

What Healthcare Reform Really Means For the U.S.
Dorene Braun  Examiner 9/23/09

Does Prosperity Entail the End of God?
Ronald Bailey  Reason 9/18/09

Science, Religion Debated As Evangelical Takes Top NIH Post
Dan Vergano  USA Today 9/11/09

Is Religiosity Beneficial in Affluent First World Nations? (press release)
Evolutionary Psychology Journal 8/31/09

Religion in the United States and Other Nations
Art Hobson NWA Times 8/29/09

(Un)wired for God
Sharon Begley Newsweek 8/13/09 print 8/24-31/09: 30 09

An Atheist Asks, 'Does Religion Cause Immorality?'
Hugh Kramer Examiner 8/7/09

America, Land of the Free Thinkers
Tom Flynn Washington Post - On Faith 3/11/09

Disbelief About Belief
Tom Flynn Washington Post - On Faith 2/8/09

Evolution: Unfinished Business
The Economist 2/5/09

Baylor Religion Survey Under Dispute
Sommer Ingram The Lariat 2/4/09

Humanist Group Claims Baylor Religion Survey Flawed
Katherine Phan Christian Post 2/4/09

Council for Secular Humanism Rips Baylor Survey on U.S. and Religion
Sam Hodges  Dallas Morning News 2/3/09

Faith Hurts
PZ Meyers Pharyngula 11/22/08

Does Religion Make You Nice? Does Atheism Make You Mean?
Paul Bloom Slate 11/7/08

What Good is God?
Helen Phillips New Scientist 9/1/07

God and Good Behavior
Gwynne Dyer The Jerusalem Post 3/21/07

The Big Religion Questions Solved!
Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia videotaped lecture (82 mins) 12/2/08

Evolution vs. Creationism Debate
Marc Steiner Show, WJHU/NPR (Baltimore), Aug. 2000, rebroadcast Dec. 2000.

Related articles

• Book Review: The Princeton Field Guide To Dinosaurs, Edited by Gregory S. Paul (blogcritics.org)
• More Secular Morality videos: the follow-up panel (atheistexperience.blogspot.com)
• Great Moments in Pedantry: How “Jurassic Park” got Velociraptors wrong (boingboing.net)

No related posts.

The effects of early religious training: Implications for…

Authors:

Hanna, Fred J.
Myer, Rick A.

Source:

Counseling & Values; Oct94, Vol. 39 Issue 1, p32, 10p

Document Type:

Article

Subject Terms:

*CHILDREN
RELIGION
RELIGIOUS life

Abstract:

Examines the impact of teaching children religion at an early age. Comparison of the concept of god taught to children to the God of theology and philosophy; Analysis of the God of childhood; Conceptualization of God by children.

Full Text Word Count:

4208

ISSN:

01607960

Accession Number:

9705070609

Persistent link to this record (Permalink):

Cut and Paste:

<A href=”http://www.phoenixpubliclibrary.org.public.phoenixpubliclibrary.org:2048/webcheck.jsp?atz=http://search.ebscohost.com.public.phoenixpubliclibrary.org:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9705070609&site=ehost-live&scope=site”>The effects of early religious training: Implications for…</A>

Database:

Education Research Complete

---

Section: PRACTICE

THE EFFECTS OF EARLY RELIGIOUS

TRAINING: IMPLICATIONS FOR

COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT

The simplistic conception of god commonly taught to children is distinguished from the God of theology and philosophy. There is evidence that children feel a considerable amount of anxiety in connection with their deity. A thorough analysis of the god of childhood reveals that many children believe in and internalize an authoritative being who is both good and evil, kind and abusive. Modeling of this being can continue into adulthood and may have a continuing effect on cognition and behavior. Implications for counseling and development are discussed.

Religious development across the life span is an important issue in counseling (Worthington, 1989) and one’s conception of God is an important aspect of that development. When this development becomes stalled at the childhood level, however, it may have negative effects that continue into adulthood. Caught between trying to explain the goodness of God and the concept of judgment, teachers use simplistic representations rather than theological works to teach children about God. The nature of childhood cognition (Piaget & Inhelder, 1969) further limits understanding to these simplistic interpretations (Nye & Carlson, 1984; O’Neil & Donovan, 1970).

“The religion of childhood is of a very special order” (Allport, 1950, p. 31) both cognitively and developmentally. Nelsen and Kroliczak (1984) found that “children continue to associate right and wrong behavior with God” (p. 267). Difficulties with respect to authority, contradictory behaviors, and control issues may arise for adults dependent on a simplistic conception of God. An investigation of this issue might explain much in the way of the cognition and behavior of adults who have not passed through more sophisficated stages of development (see Loevinger, 1976, 1985).

This article is divided into three sections: (a) analysis of the child’s conception of God, (b) cognitive, emotional, and developmental effects, and (c) implications for counseling. For the sake of clarity, God will be referred to in the masculine because that is how it has been commonly presented. Also, because the conception of God presented is not that of classical theology or the philosophy of religion, it will be referred to in small letters to differentiate this article from such treatises. We will use a time-honored method of philosophical analysis called reductio ad absurdurn (Angeles, 1981) to follow the logical progression of applying a simplistic concept of God to an adult framework of understanding. In using this method, we encourage a close examination of the traditional teaching methods used when instructing children about the concept of God. Our goal is to promote healthy and mature religious development. <more on line>

Read the entire article on line via your public library or university library research facilities.  Many children remain stuck in the infantile understanding of religion they were taught as children. Some children develop mental pathologies because of this teaching. The indoctrination process has been worked on and refined over centuries and is extremely effective.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ497261

Related articles

• You cannot end the religious indoctrination of vunerable children (endhereditaryreligion.com)
• The god gene – or is it a meme? (openparachute.wordpress.com)
• My deconversion and my father (new.exchristian.net)
• Worship has no place in schools | Jacob Huckle (guardian.co.uk)

No related posts.

We interrupt this forum for some breaking news!

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=9730224

A massive new federal study documents an unprecedented and dramatic decrease in incidents of serious child abuse, especially sexual abuse. Experts hailed the findings as proof that crackdowns and public awareness campaigns had made headway.

An estimated 553,000 children suffered physical, sexual or emotional abuse in 2005-06, down 26 percent from the estimated 743,200 abuse victims in 1993, the study found.

“It’s the first time since we started collecting data about these things that we’ve seen substantial declines over a long period, and that’s tremendously encouraging,” said professor David Finkelhor of the University of New Hampshire, a leading researcher in the field of child abuse.

“It does suggest that the mobilization around this issue is helping and it’s a problem that is amenable to solutions,” he said.

But the study points out that 500,000 children were still abused. That is not acceptable, especially in view of the fact that the abused often turn around and abuse others. We must get ahead of the problem and stop sweeping up after the harm has already occurred. Nonetheless, we see that preventive measures do help and that should give us hope we are moving in the right direction.

What would really help is to develop a national policy that set forth requirements for competent parenting and widespread parental training classes. As a final measure licensing of prospective parents could be the next step. Abolishing all forms of physical punishment and verbal abuse must be instituted. There is never any reason to hit a child or threaten them with violence.

The libertarian and conservative religious ideology that family privacy trumps any efforts by the state to intervene in family matters until damage has occured has to go. Parents are not free to do as they please to their children.

Related articles by Zemanta

• In France, a Move to Outlaw Psychological Abuse in Marriage (time.com)

No related posts.

Bottoms, B. L., Shaver, P. R., Goodman, G. S., & Qin, J. (1995). In the name of God:
A profile of religion-related child abuse. Journal of Social Issues, 51 (2), 85-111.

Bottoms, B. L., Shaver, P. R., & Goodman, G. S. (1996). An analysis of ritualistic
and religion-related child abuse allegations. Law and Human Behavior, 20 (1), 1-34.

Capps, D. (1992). Religion and child abuse: Perfect together. Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion, 31 (1), 1-14. [ This paper is available on line and worth study, http://bit.ly/8k8Kwf
Abstract
Religious beliefs can foster, encourage, and justify child abuse, yet religious motivations for child abuse and neglect have been virtually ignored in social science research. In this paper, we compare victims' retrospective reports of religion-related child physical abuse to other reported cases of child physical abuse. We describe in statistical detail the nature and circumstances of the abuse, characteristics of victims and perpetrators, and the spiritual and psychological impact of the abuse. Results indicate that although the basic characteristics of religion-related physical abuse are similar to non-
religion-related physical abuse, religion-related abuse has significantly more negative implications for its victims' long-term psychological well-being

Capps. D. (1995). The child’s song: The religious abuse of children. Louisville, KY:
Westminster John Knox Press.
Religion and child abu3se1

Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (1997). How the experience of early
physical abuse leads children to become chronically aggressive. In Developmental
perspectives on trauma: Theory, research, and intervention (Vol. 8, pp. 263-288).
Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Doxey, C., Jensen, L., & Jensen, J. (1997). The influence of religion on victims of
childhood sexual abuse. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 7, 179-186.

Ellison, C. G., & Sherkat, D. E. (1993). Conservative Protestantism and support for
corporal punishment. American Sociological Review, 58 (1), 131-145.

Ellison, C. G., Bartkowski, J. P., & Segal, M. L. (1996a). Do conservative Protestant
parents spank more often? Further evidence from the national survey of families and
households. Social Science Quarterly, 77, 663-673.

Ellison, C. G., Bartkowski, J. P., & Segal, M. L. (1996b). Conservative Protestantism
and the parental use of corporal punishment. Social Forces, 74 (3), 1003-1028.

Flynn, C. P. (1996). Normative support for corporal punishment: Attitudes,
Religion and child abu3se2
correlates, and implications. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 1 (1), 47-55.

Correlates of multiple forms of victimization in religion-related child abuse cases. Journal of
Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 2, 273-295. [Reprinted in B. B. R. Rossman & M. S.

Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Psychology of religion. Annual Review of Psychology, 39,
202-221.

Greven, P. (1991). Spare the child: The religious roots of punishment and the
psychological impact of physical abuse. New York: Knopf.

Hunsberger, B. (1989). A short version of the Christian orthodoxy scale. Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion, 28, 360-365.

Jackson, S., Law, L., Thompson, R.A., Christiansen, E. H., Colman, R. A., & Wyatt,
J. (1999). Predicting abuse-prone parental attitudes and discipline practices in a
nationally representative sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 23 (1), 15-29.

Johnson, B. W., & Eastburg, M.C. (1992). God, parent and self concepts in abused
and nonabused children. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 11 (3), 235-243.

Kane, D., Cheston, S. E., & Greer, J. (1993). Perceptions of God by survivors of
childhood sexual abuse: An exploratory study in an underresearched area. Journal of
Religion and child abu3se3

Psychology and Theology, 21 (3), 228-237.

Lawson, R., Drebing, C., Berg, G., Vincellette A., & Penk, W. (1998). The long term
impact of child abuse on religious behavior and spirituality in men. Child Abuse
& Neglect, 22 (5), 369-380.

Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1998). An ecological-transactional analysis of children
and contexts: The longitudinal interplay among child maltreatment, community violence, and
Religion and child abu3se4
children’s symptomatology. Development and Psychopathology, 10 (2), 235-257.

Maurer, A. (1982). Religious values and child abuse. Child & Youth Services, 4, 57-
63.

Malcarne, V. L., & Burchard, J. D. (1992). Investigations of child abuse/neglect
allegations in religious cults: A case study in Vermont. Behavioral Sciences & the Law,
10(1), 75-88.

Maxfield, M. G., & Widom, C. S. (1996). The cycle of violence: Revisited six years
later. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 150, 390-395.
.
Nelsen, H. M., & Kroliczak, A. (1984). Parental use of the threat “God will punish”:

Replication and extension. Journal for Scientific Study of Religion, 23 (3), 267-277.

Neufeld, K. (1979). Child-rearing, religion, abusive parents. Religious Education, 74
(3), 235-243.

Pagelow, M. D., & Johnson, P. (1998). Abuse in the American family: The role of
religion. In A. L. Horton & J. A. Williamson (Eds.), Abuse and religion: When praying isn't
enough. (pp. 1-12).

Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religious coping. New York: Guilford.
Pelcovitz, D., Kaplan, S., Goldenberg, B., & Mandel, F. (1994). Posttraumatic stress
disorder in physically abused adolescents. Journal of American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry, 33 (3), 305-312.

Quas, J. A., Bottoms, B. L., & Nunez, N. (Eds.) (2002). Linking Juvenile Delinquency
and Child Maltreatment: Causes, Correlates, and Consequences. Special issue of
Religion and child abuse 5

Children's Services: Social Policy, Research, and Practice, 5(4).
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research
in the general population. Journal of Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401.

Rice, R. R., & Annis, A. W. (1992). A survey of abuse in the Christian Reformed
Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Social Research Center of Calvin College.

Rosenberg, M. J. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.

Rossetti, S. J. (1995). The impact of child sexual abuse on attitudes toward God and
the Catholic Church. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19 (12), 1469-1481.

Ryan, P. L. (1998). Spirituality among adult survivors of childhood violence: A
literature review. The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 30 (1), 39-51.

Sheshkin, D. J. (2000). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical
procedures (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.

Shor, R. (1998). The significance of religion in advancing a culturally sensitive
approach towards child maltreatment. Families in Society, 79 (4), 400-409.

Simons, R. L., Whitbeck, L. B., Conger, R. D., & Chyi-In, W. (1991).
Intergenerational transmission of harsh parenting. Developmental Psychology, 27, 159-171.

Straus, M. (1994). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American
families. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000). Child maltreatment 1998:
Religion and child abu3se6

Wiehe, V. R. (1990). Religious influence on parental attitudes toward the use of
corporal punishment. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 173-186.

Related articles by Zemanta

• James Dobson just has to be responsible for many psycopaths in America (endhereditaryreligion.com)
• We can't afford to abandon the children who are suffering from domestic violence (telegraph.co.uk)
• Child abuse drops dramatically in U.S. (msnbc.msn.com)

No related posts.