30-016 · EVIDENCE A · SOURCE-SENSITIVE
Do not hit your child, and do not yell or call them stupid: children who are often hit or verbally abused show more behavior and emotional problems
管孩子别动手打,也别吼骂、骂他笨:常挨打挨骂的孩子,行为和情绪问题都更多
No money. The hard part is stopping your hands and mouth in the heat of the moment and switching to non-violent discipline. What to switch to is covered in item 17 in this section (parenting classes that teach concrete skills).
Children who are often physically punished show more aggression and psychological problems, feel more distant from parents, and receive harsher beating. Whether spanking makes a child obey on the spot is unclear in the evidence. Adolescents who are often yelled at or called stupid at age 13 show more misconduct and depression the next year; warm parenting does not cancel that link.
A
Move “Do not hit your child, and do not yell or call them stupid: children who are often hit or verbally abused show more behavior and emotional problems” to Future Me's calendar
The excuse
I can spend longer deciding whether to start than the small action would take.
What feels good now
Today I keep a few minutes, a bit of persistence and avoid interrupting my default routine.
What the source says
The source summarizes the return this way: “Children who are often physically punished show more aggression and psychological problems, feel more distant from parents, and receive harsher beating. Whether spanking makes a child obey on the spot is unclear in the evidence. Adolescents who are often yelled at or called stupid at age 13 show more misconduct and depression the next year; warm parenting does not cancel that link.” Evidence grade A. The original states the population, caveats, and sources; this is not a personal forecast.
Use the original facts and limits. For an urgent medical, safety, financial, or legal issue, contact a qualified local professional or service.
THE ENGLISH EDITION
Original recommendation and evidence
16. Do not hit your child, and do not yell or call them stupid: children who are often hit or verbally abused show more behavior and emotional problems
Cost: No money. The hard part is stopping your hands and mouth in the heat of the moment and switching to non-violent discipline. What to switch to is covered in item 17 in this section (parenting classes that teach concrete skills).
In plain terms: Children who are often physically punished show more aggression and psychological problems, feel more distant from parents, and receive harsher beating. Whether spanking makes a child obey on the spot is unclear in the evidence. Adolescents who are often yelled at or called stupid at age 13 show more misconduct and depression the next year; warm parenting does not cancel that link.
Benefit: For physical punishment, one meta-analysis counted only open-hand spanking of the buttocks or limbs. It pooled 75 studies with 111 effect sizes and 160,927 children. Of 17 outcomes, 13 were significantly associated with spanking, all in harmful directions. Cohen’s d: 0.2 small, 0.5 medium. Childhood aggression d = 0.37 (95% CI 0.13–0.61). Externalizing problems 0.41 (hitting, rule-breaking). Internalizing 0.24 (anxiety, depression). Mental health problems 0.53. Poor parent–child relationship 0.51. Low self-esteem 0.15. Poor cognitive ability 0.17. Parental physical abuse 0.64. Adult antisocial behavior 0.36. Adult mental health 0.24. Pooled across 111 effects d = 0.33 (0.29–0.38). Immediate compliance was not clearly linked (d = 0.14, −0.19–0.47), with only 5 effect sizes. Another review of 69 longitudinal studies found spanking reliably predicted later behavior problems and no long-term benefits; 7 studies counted frequency, 5 found more spanking linked to worse outcomes. For yelling: a U.S. study followed 976 two-parent families. Frequent yelling, cursing, or calling the child stupid or lazy at age 13 predicted more misconduct and depressive symptoms between ages 13 and 14. Parental warmth did not offset the association; the reverse also held — more misconduct at 13 predicted more yelling later. Under China’s Anti–Domestic Violence Law Article 2, domestic violence includes beating, binding, mutilation, restricting personal freedom, and habitual verbal abuse or intimidation. Article 12 requires guardians to practice civilized family education. When parents harm a child’s rights, neighborhood committees must counsel and stop them and report serious cases to police. Public security, procuratorate, and courts may admonish parents and order family-education guidance (nationwide).
Evidence grade: A
Sources: Gershoff ET, Grogan-Kaylor A. (2016). Spanking and child outcomes: Old controversies and new meta-analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(4), 453–469. <https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000191>; Heilmann A, Mehay A, Watt RG, et al. (2021). Physical punishment and child outcomes: a narrative review of prospective studies. Lancet, 398(10297), 355–364. <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00582-1>; Wang MT, Kenny S. (2014). Longitudinal links between fathers' and mothers' harsh verbal discipline and adolescents' conduct problems and depressive symptoms. Child Development, 85(3), 908–923. <https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12143>; Ferguson CJ. (2013). Spanking, corporate punishment and negative long-term outcomes: a meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(1), 196–208. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.11.002>; Larzelere RE, Kuhn BR. (2005). Comparing child outcomes of physical punishment and alternative disciplinary tactics: a meta-analysis. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 8(1), 1–37. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-005-2340-z>; National People's Congress Standing Committee (2015). Anti-Domestic Violence Law (Article 2, 12). <https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=2c909fdd678bf17901678bf7f9d60889>; National People's Congress Standing Committee (amended in 2024). Protection of Minors Law (Articles 11, 17, 118). <https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=ff8081818f197cf001905e567af635a0>; National People's Congress Standing Committee (2021). Family Education Promotion Law (Articles 23, 53). <https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=ff8081817cac3b2d017cac5a6c6f0109>
Notes: Controversial. These studies are almost all observational, not randomized trials, so causation is unclear. In the spanking meta-analysis, 72% of studies were cross-sectional or relied on recall. A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies found that after adjusting for prior child behavior, links to externalizing problems fell to 0.07 and internalizing to 0.10; those authors judged effects small. Another meta-analysis found “conditional” spanking outperformed 10 of 13 alternative discipline methods for reducing defiance and antisocial behavior, but severe or predominant spanking did worse than alternatives. Critics and supporters agree that heavy, frequent hitting and verbal abuse are worse. Occasional single spank or shout is not explicitly labeled domestic violence in the law, which names beating and habitual verbal abuse or intimidation. Main beneficiaries are children. If someone else in the family hits the child, see Section 8, item 43 (personal safety protection orders). Anyone may dissuade or report chronic child abuse to police, civil affairs, or education authorities; for strangers’ households, calling 110 or telling the neighborhood committee is enough — do not force your way in.
Source links
- Gershoff ET, Grogan-Kaylor A. (2016). Spanking and child outcomes: Old controversies and new meta-analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(4), 453–469. ↗
- Heilmann A, Mehay A, Watt RG, et al. (2021). Physical punishment and child outcomes: a narrative review of prospective studies. Lancet, 398(10297), 355–364. ↗
- Wang MT, Kenny S. (2014). Longitudinal links between fathers' and mothers' harsh verbal discipline and adolescents' conduct problems and depressive symptoms. Child Development, 85(3), 908–923. ↗
- Ferguson CJ. (2013). Spanking, corporal punishment and negative long-term outcomes: a meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(1), 196–208. ↗
- Larzelere RE, Kuhn BR. (2005). Comparing child outcomes of physical punishment and alternative disciplinary tactics: a meta-analysis. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 8(1), 1–37. ↗
- 全国人大常委会 (2015). 反家庭暴力法(第二、十二条). ↗
- 全国人大常委会 (2024 年修正). 未成年人保护法(第十一、十七、一百一十八条). ↗
- 全国人大常委会 (2021). 家庭教育促进法(第二十三、五十三条). ↗
- Pinned original chapter on GitHub ↗
Read the complete Chinese source and notes
16. 管孩子别动手打,也别吼骂、骂他笨:常挨打挨骂的孩子,行为和情绪问题都更多
成本: 不花钱。难在火上来的那一刻停住手和嘴,还得换一套不打不骂的管法。换成什么管法,见本节第 17 条(教具体做法的家长课)。
说人话: 常挨打的孩子,攻击性和心理问题都更多,和父母也更疏远,挨更重的打也更多。打能不能让孩子当场听话,证据说不清。13 岁时常被吼、被骂笨的孩子,之后闯祸和抑郁都更多,父母平时再亲热也抵不掉。
收益: 先看打。一篇荟萃分析只算「张开手打屁股或打手脚」这一种。它汇总了 75 项研究、111 个效果值,共 160927 名孩子。17 项结果里有 13 项和挨打明显有关,方向全是坏的。d 是效果大小,0.2 算小,0.5 算中等。小时候的攻击性 d = 0.37(95% CI 0.13–0.61,可信范围)。外显问题 0.41,指打人、违反规矩这类。内化问题 0.24,指焦虑、抑郁这类。心理健康问题 0.53,和父母关系差 0.51,自尊低 0.15,认知能力差 0.17。被父母施加身体虐待 0.64。长大后的反社会行为 0.36,心理健康问题 0.24。111 个效果值合起来是 d = 0.33(0.29–0.38)。孩子当场听不听话,和挨不挨打关系不明显(d = 0.14,−0.19–0.47),这一项只有 5 个效果值。另一篇综述只看前后跟踪的研究,共 69 项。体罚稳定地预示孩子之后的行为问题变多,没看到它和任何长期的好结果有关。其中 7 项研究看了打的次数,5 项发现打得越多、问题越重。再看吼骂。美国一项研究跟踪了 976 个父母双全的家庭。孩子 13 岁时,父母常吼叫、骂脏话、骂孩子笨或懒,孩子 13 到 14 岁之间闯祸和抑郁症状都增加。父母平时亲不亲热,都抵消不了这个关联。反过来也成立:13 岁时闯祸多的孩子,之后挨骂也更多。法律上,父母不得对孩子实施家庭暴力。《反家庭暴力法》第二条列了家庭暴力的方式:殴打、捆绑、残害、限制人身自由,以及经常性谩骂、恐吓。该法第十二条要求监护人用文明的方式进行家庭教育。父母侵犯孩子权益的,居委会、村委会要劝诫、制止,情节严重的报公安。公安、检察院、法院发现了,应当训诫父母,并可以责令他们接受家庭教育指导(全国)
证据等级: A
来源: Gershoff ET, Grogan-Kaylor A. (2016). Spanking and child outcomes: Old controversies and new meta-analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(4), 453–469. <https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000191>;Heilmann A, Mehay A, Watt RG, et al. (2021). Physical punishment and child outcomes: a narrative review of prospective studies. Lancet, 398(10297), 355–364. <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00582-1>;Wang MT, Kenny S. (2014). Longitudinal links between fathers' and mothers' harsh verbal discipline and adolescents' conduct problems and depressive symptoms. Child Development, 85(3), 908–923. <https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12143>;Ferguson CJ. (2013). Spanking, corporal punishment and negative long-term outcomes: a meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(1), 196–208. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.11.002>;Larzelere RE, Kuhn BR. (2005). Comparing child outcomes of physical punishment and alternative disciplinary tactics: a meta-analysis. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 8(1), 1–37. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-005-2340-z>;全国人大常委会 (2015). 反家庭暴力法(第二、十二条). <https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=2c909fdd678bf17901678bf7f9d60889>;全国人大常委会 (2024 年修正). 未成年人保护法(第十一、十七、一百一十八条). <https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=ff8081818f197cf001905e567af635a0>;全国人大常委会 (2021). 家庭教育促进法(第二十三、五十三条). <https://flk.npc.gov.cn/detail?id=ff8081817cac3b2d017cac5a6c6f0109>
备注: 争议。这些研究几乎都只是跟踪记录、没有分组对照,说明不了谁导致谁。打屁股那篇荟萃里,72% 的研究只看两件事是否一起出现,或者靠事后回忆。另一篇荟萃只收前后跟踪的研究,扣掉孩子原来的行为之后,打屁股和外显问题的关联只剩 0.07,和内化问题只剩 0.10。那篇的作者认为影响很小。还有一篇荟萃发现,「有条件地打」在减少不听话和反社会行为上,比 13 种别的管法里的 10 种效果好。它也发现,打得过重或者以打为主,就比别的管法差。所以反方能说明的是:少量、有条件地打,未必比别的管法差。打得重、常打常骂,两边都认为更差。偶尔打一下、吼一句,法条没有明说就是家暴,它点名的是殴打和经常性的谩骂、恐吓。受益人主要是孩子。家里别人打孩子,报警和申请保护令见第 8 节第 43 条(人身安全保护令)。看到别人家长期打孩子,任何人都有权劝阻,或者向公安、民政、教育部门检举。对陌生人家里的事,打 110 或者告诉居委会就够了,别自己上门拉架。
YOUR PRIVATE LIST