The Neurobiology of DisciplineThe Behavioral Cost of Corporal Punishment

01Introduction

Everyone was once a child—small hands first grasping fingers, then bicycle handles, and eventually phones. Hands are often the first way care is felt, wrapping gently around a newborn to guide and protect. Yet historically, those same hands have not always been gentle. In many societies, physical discipline was viewed as a necessary tool for shaping behavior and instilling obedience. In Colonial America, public flogging was used against misdemeanors, utilizing the human quality of humiliation as a way to deter a moral wrong (Scheb & Stephens, n.d.). Enslaved parents during the Antebellum era inherited the pressure to discipline their children harshly in order to give them the best life possible considering the circumstances. By preparing their children to appear “docile” and compliant, the parents were using discipline as a survival strategy (Booker, 2023). This differed from the violence the children often received from their white counterparts because in that case the discipline came with the intent of cruelty. As the cruel treatment gradually ended post-emancipation, the disciplinary practices continued their prevalence in Black parenting.

Religion, too, played a key role by serving as justification for corporal punishment. One commonly cited rationale from the Bible is Proverbs 22:15—“Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction shall drive it from him.” Teachings such as that were hardly few and far between amongst religious texts, and these cultures which amassed large followings shaped cultural norms. In time, some questions regarding the ethics of the practice came about, and in the Supreme Court case Jackson v. Bishop (1968), corporal punishment was ruled unconstitutional in prisons. That boundary, however, stopped at prisons and the school systems in America remained legal, with courts determining schools were acting in loco parentis—in place of the parents.

Today, the prevalence of corporal punishment remains a global norm; nearly 90% of children and adolescents have experienced some form of physical discipline, with the most frequent application occurring during the formative age of four (Cody-Rydzewski, 2026). This widespread usage fuels a cycle of intergenerational transmission, where the physical corrections of childhood become the primary disciplinary scripts for adulthood. While individuals who were spanked are statistically more likely to utilize physical force with their own children, this cycle is not inevitable; rather, it is significantly mitigated by socioeconomic factors (Cody-Rydzewski, 2026). Specifically, those who successfully disrupt this historical pattern tend to possess higher levels of education and enter parenthood at a later age, suggesting that academic exposure and emotional maturity act as critical 'interrupters' to inherited disciplinary traditions. The association between region and display of corporal punishment may be connected to the predominance of religious conservatism and biblical literalism found in the southern region of the United States.

Through the progression of corporal punishment from its important place in history and present prevalent data, research now examines outcomes through psychological and behavioral lenses. The socio-emotional development of young children who experience physical discipline is altered significantly, and remains a largely unaddressed aspect of everyday family dynamics. Neural responses to threats have been researched, and the data shows a “higher activity response in the areas of their brain that regulate these emotional responses and detect threats” when exposed to facial expressions, “even to facial expressions that most would consider non-threatening” (Cuartas et al., 2021). While corporal punishment is widely accepted, the evidence suggests long-lasting & adverse psychological impacts of it, so further investigation is strongly warranted.

02History

While often viewed through a modern lens as mere discipline, the earliest historical records of corporal correction reveal it as a foundational tool for both pedagogical mastery and cultural initiation. Across Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Greece physical correction was the default for molding citizens and students (van Gennep, 2019).

There were the schoolboy essays where Sumerian tablets describe a student being caned by various school officials for arriving late, speaking without permission, or having poor handwriting. In this case it was done with the intent of correcting their school habits; however, they were experiencing physical discipline for misbehaving (Kramer, 1988).

The Code of Hammurabi, while largely focusing on adult legalities, also in fact established the eye for an eye philosophy, lex talionis, which heavily influenced societal view that physical pain was a fair and corrective response to wrongdoing. In ancient Egypt there was the instructional papyri, a common Egyptian proverb found in a pedagogical text stating, "A boy's ears are on his back; he listens when he is beaten” (Museum, 2016). There were many of these common texts across these different cultures that claimed, again and again, that children and youth required to have this correction done with them in a physical sense and that it was a primary conduit for learning.

Beyond the classroom physical correction evolved into a ritualized trial of fortitude designed to transition youths into adulthood. The Maasai from East Africa did a circumcision for young men and it was performed without any anesthetic. The specific correction and rule here is total stillness; if the boy flinches, blinks, or cries out, he shames his family and may be labeled a coward for life. Similarly the Falani from West Africa had a Shoro festival, which involved young men whipping each other. These youth are committing this painful act to each other and the goal was to show no signs of pain while being struck. This was a ritualized punishment that served as a social vetting process for marriage and leadership. These young men were not viewed in society as enough if they were not up to par with these painful rituals and these often harsh expectations on them (van Gennep, 2019).

The Xosha from South Africa, the Ulwalukoq in particular, involves a period of isolation in the bush, physical hardship including cold, hunger, and the pain of the ritual itself. This was seen as correcting the softness of childhood, specifically with the young males in these African cultures. They were expected to have this sense of strength, this sense of hardness, that was something that the community was supposed to develop in them through these rituals. It was the idea that the community would band together, do these practices, have them whip each other or circumcise them, with the intent and the hope that it would prove and help those men get over that last hurdle. They were essentially reaching what they needed to reach to become a real man and to become a stable member of society, a worthy member of those African cultural societies (van Gennep, 2019).

The transformative use of physical restriction was equally prevalent in female rites of passage, where the correction shifted from outward endurance to inward isolation. In many historical Asian and Hindu contexts rituals surrounding a girl's first period were less about beating and more about physical restriction in isolation, which is its own form of correction/discipline. In a lot of South Indian traditions the Ritu Kala Sama Karaska, the half ceremony, historically involved isolating the girl in a separate room for three to eleven days. She was often forbidden from looking at men, including her father, and had to follow a strict bland diet to cool the body. The correction here was the social molding of the girl into a pure woman (Gruenbaum, 2001).

Similarly in Nepal, specifically Chhaputhiri, a more extreme and controversial version was that girls were, and in some remote areas still are today, forced to stay in period huts. While not hitting, the physical exposure to the elements and the strict taboo against touching communal resources served as a harsh physical reminder of her new social status. There was a big focus overall on seclusion, dietary restriction, and social taboos on the girls in order to elevate their status from child to woman. This often was rooted in the idea that women were weakened and they were inferior to men when they went through this passage and that they were dirty and impure for having that blood and menstruation happen through them (Gruenbaum, 2001).

It had a lot more of a mental manipulation with the girls as opposed to the men, where it was more of this physical pain that was being used as this vessel to correct them and prepare them for a world that was oftentimes very cruel and very difficult to survive in, in these ancient times. Ultimately these diverse cultural practices demonstrate that throughout history the application of physical hardship served as a social anchor, marking the boundaries between childhood and maturity. It wasn't just about simply being mean or getting out their anger on the children. It was a social gatekeeper that helped these kids achieve the next level of social status and power in their societies. They needed to make sure that they were able to get enough food for their family and they had to be able to raise a family. These kinds of traits were not necessarily taught in whatever school systems or rudimentary education centers that these cultures had during this time period so it was something that was intended to be taught through these correctional practices. When a young man is supposed to be hunting for his family, it is understandable how he was expected to learn how to take pain and learn how to lose fear and keep still because these are all things that one needs when hunting or when trying to support a family in that way.

03Religion

Beyond secular law, religious doctrines historically framed corporal correction as a sacred duty intended to align the human soul with divine will. The Judeo-Christian Solomonic Doctrine stated that the book of Proverbs (700 BCE) introduces the shebet, a rod. Proverbs 22:15 claims, "Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, and only the rod of discipline can drive it out." In medieval Europe the mortification of the flesh was formalized in a monastic life. The pain of the lash was viewed as a mercy that suppressed sinful impulses before they could take root. It was essentially a form to bring about this pain because it would act as quite a fast-acting and simple reminder of what was a positive or a negative action from a young age. With the hope that as this youth and this child would grow older and older, they would no longer need that physical pain to help them understand what was right or wrong to do in a situation, The Rule of Saint Benedict from the 6th century expands on specifically mandated sharp stripes for boys too young to understand excommunication. The pain was meant to break the stubborn will to allow for divine obedience (The Rule of Saint Benedict, c. 530 CE).

Medieval religious institutions formalized this practice and made sure to push it through to each of the young boys involved in their community because they couldn't quite yet understand the consequences of being a lacking member in society, not being a good enough part of the religion. They were able to understand from these more physical means because essentially the child, at the very youngest stage of moral development (which is pre-conventional), you essentially are choosing to do things or choose not to do things. You make those decisions simply based on the positive or negative consequences. A young child may decide not to steal a piece of bread solely because they're hoping to avoid a spank from their mother. They haven't quite reached that conventional and post-conventional stage.

When you start to either pay more attention to social expectations and the way you're viewed socially or eventually develop your own moral code and act upon your own values instead at this formational stage, the kids are very susceptible to going down bad paths and engaging in misbehavior. In order to eliminate this, a lot of these religious texts were using that very basic foundational aspect of pain or no pain as a form of teaching and impressing this belief of what is right and what is wrong in the kids.

Similarly in historical Islamic pedagogy the application of physical reminders was often linked to the cultivation of adab or the disciplined character required for a life of faith. The falqah in

Islamic maktabs was historically the idea that teachers used a wooden pole with loops to hold a student's feet for striking. The goal was to instill adab, which is spiritual etiquette. However the scholar Ibn Khaldun from 1377 CE famously warned that harshness makes the soul lose its energy. He was very ahead of his time in the sense that he was coming into this, believing that these very impressionable kids, who had all this energy and all this excitement and this curiosity in the world (which more often than not is what caused them to engage in the misbehaviors that got them into these correctional situations), are a spirit, an energy, and a drive that's mostly found in youth. That can easily be snuffed out if repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly it is met with harshness and negative consequences (Ibn Khaldun, 1377 CE).

In Eastern traditions physical correction was sometimes framed as a form of penance where the temporary discomfort of the body ensured the long-term alignment of the individual's spiritual duty. A lot of Hindu people focused on separating their physical and engaged in these physically demanding practices with the hope that their spiritual sense in the afterlife would be able to achieve the sense of peace, the sense of goodness. They were thinking a little bit more about the bigger picture.

In the Dharmasutras, physical discomfort or tapas (heat and austerity) was a way to cleanse the atman (which means soul). For students a light cane was permitted to ensure they stay focused on their sacred Vedas. It was important to this culture that from a young age people were engaged and aware of their religion and their social expectations related to the religion. If they were not consistent with doing these rituals, these pujas (prayers), then from a parent's perspective they have failed their child because their child's spirit after death would not achieve that sense of peace and that sense of connection. It was all in the hopes that when one lies at their deathbed at the end of their life they have achieved this sense of good karma, this sense of correct behavior. That is what spurred a lot of these correctional practices in these kids. Corporal punishment was the most prevalent out of these correctional practices but not necessarily the only one (Olivelle, 2004).

By framing physical correction as a divine or cosmic requirement, religious frameworks provided a powerful moral justification that sustained these practices for millennia. The Puritan Blue Laws from the 17th century stated that New England Puritans believed children were born with original sin. When they first came into the world they were impure and needed some sort of physical correction. This physical correction was perceived as a godly duty to beat the devil out of a child and to ensure their salvation. The theology here was that breaking a child's "stubborn will" was the only way to make them "malleable" for God’s grace. Again here we see this belief from the older people in a community that they feel this need to pass on to the younger ones and make sure that they, at the end of their life, can achieve this salvation, can achieve this spiritual duty, this life of faith at the end of the road. That was what brought them direction and that was the way that they used their faith to help them understand an un-understandable world. By elevating physical correction to a theological requirement, these faiths provided a moral justification that persisted long after ancient legal codes had faded (Greven, 1991).

04Biological Impact

Transitioning from the religious mandate of "breaking the will," we find that what was historically labeled as "folly" or "sin" is actually the brain’s response to cortisol and adrenaline. When a child is physically disciplined, the body enters a state of fight-or-flight. In a typical developing brain, this stress response is temporary. However, for the 90% of children experiencing regular corporal punishment, this becomes a chronic physiological state. This leads to an "allostatic load"—a wear-and-tear on the body that disrupts the endocrine system, potentially leading to long-term issues with inflammation and immune response (Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016). This chronic activation means the intended correction does not end when the physical pain stops. The body remains in a chemical state of high alert, which has been linked to long-term immune system suppression and cardiovascular strain.

The most striking evidence for biological alteration comes from functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI). A landmark study at Harvard University revealed that children who are spanked exhibited significantly higher neural activity in the amygdala when exposed to neutral facial expressions (Cuartas et al., 2021). Because the brain is a plastic organ designed for survival, it wires itself to anticipate aggression. In these children, the amygdala—an almond-shaped structure nestled deep within the brain's temporal lobe that is responsible for processing intense emotional responses, encoding fear-based memories, and instantly triggering the autonomic nervous system—acts as the brain’s smoke detector and becomes severely hypersensitive. This biological “threat-bias” explains why children from high correction environments often struggle with social-emotional development; they literally perceive a teacher's resting face or the appearance of an accidental bump as an imminent physical attack.

Conversely, while the fear centers are over-developed, the centers for self-regulation are often diminished. Research by Tomoda et al. (2009) found that harsh corporal punishment is associated with a physical reduction in prefrontal cortex (PFC) gray matter volume. However, modern neuroimaging tracking white matter structure reveals an even deeper deficit in functionality. Utilizing Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) to measure the microstructural direction of water molecule flow through the brain, researchers have found that severe developmental stress and childhood adversity significantly impair the structural integrity of vital white matter pathways, such as the corpus callosum and fronto-limbic networks (Hart & Rubia, 2012; McCarthy-Jones et al., 2017). These white matter tracts serve as the brain's heavily myelinated "cables" responsible for rapid, long-distance communication between regions. When DTI scans reveal reduced fractional anisotropy (directional water flow) in these pathways, it signifies axonal damage or decreased myelination (McCarthy-Jones et al., 2017). This directly compromises the brain's ability to transmit executive commands smoothly from the prefrontal cortex to lower emotional centers. By physically punishing a child to teach self-control, the practice ironically damages the very neural insulation and communication pathways required to execute that control. This creates a biological deficit where the child is forced to rely on primitive, reactive brain regions rather than the higher-order reasoning centers needed for modern social success.

Critics often argue that “difficult” children simply elicit more punishment, suggesting the behavior causes the hitting rather than the other way around. However, sibling comparison studies provide genetic control. A study utilized a large sample of siblings to show that even when sharing 50 to 100% of their DNA and the same home environment, the sibling who received more physical discipline consistently displayed higher levels of antisocial behavior and lower cognitive scores (Burt et al., 2006). These findings suggest the biological impact is a direct result of the physical stimuli, not merely a reflection of the child’s born temperament.

Neuroscientific studies now demonstrate that corporal punishment triggers a state of chronic hypervigilance. Specifically, children subjected to physical correction show significantly higher activity in the amygdala, the brain's threat detection center, and the prefrontal cortex when exposed to neutral facial expressions (Cuartas et al., 2021). When in this study the children were shown neutral, aggressive, and positive facial expressions, it was measured what their response was and the way they reacted to the potential of a threat or not a threat. Even when presented with a neutral expression that, to the average child who did not experience corporal punishment, seems to be neutral, the kids that had experienced any form of corporal punishment when they were younger did seem to find more of a threat and more of a fear response to a neutral person. This indicates a significant after-effect of experiencing this physical correction, especially from a parental figure who is often the center of love, connection, and importance to the kid. For these children, the brain essentially rewires itself to perceive a non-threatening environment as a source of potential danger. This suggests that the brain does not distinguish between socially accepted discipline and severe maltreatment at a cellular level; both activate the same defensive neural pathways. This can continue on as a child grows and is in part why there is increased aggression in people who have experienced this in their past. When someone can't learn to differentiate between a threat and a non-threatening person or experience or situation, they're more often than not going to respond to a completely unwarranted stimulus or situation in a way that is unnecessary and aggressive. They will act in a flight-or-fight response more often, and that consistent fear and that consistent on-alert emotion is what causes them a higher chance of developing mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

Finally, the impact of corporal punishment extends to the brain’s dopamine-driven reward system. A study by Heins et al. (2021) indicates that children who face physical correction often exhibit “Blunted Reward Positivity.” Because the brain is so focused on avoiding the “stick,” it loses the ability to fully process the “carrot.” This neural adaptation makes positive reinforcement—the backbone of modern education—less effective. The brain plasticity meant to facilitate learning instead becomes a liability as it encodes a permanent blueprint that equates authority with pain and minimizes the value of positive social rewards.

05Socioeconomic and Cultural Factors

As historical justifications for corporal punishment began to wane, modern sociologists shifted their focus toward the measurable socioeconomic outcomes and behavioral patterns that these practices left in their wake. A 2019 JAMA study of 36,309 adults found that 47.3% of the antisocial behavior in the US is linked to childhood physical discipline (Afifi et al., 2019). When kids experience corporal punishment, almost half of them end up coming out with these behaviors and maladaptive traits that an individual not exposed to that kind of harsh treatment wouldn't have. Even without other maltreatment, spanking alone increases the risk of adult aggression. When youth are exposed to corporal punishment, it can be very difficult for them to differentiate healthy ways to cope with anger. Then they're often instigating this corporal punishment because of some sort of misbehavior. And when their consistent misbehavior is met with consistent backlash and consistent violent tendencies, they grow to assimilate into that belief. And they too believe that the right way to respond when in anger is through physical means, which is in part why there's increased adult aggression when there's a child that experiences a physical correction.

One of the most significant variables in the decline of corporal punishment is parental education, which often acts as a pivot point for a family's disciplinary philosophy. When parents are going through college and higher levels of schooling, they're being exposed to more experiences where they learn from other people. They have to do problem-solving, working in teams, and also get to experience what it is like to discuss the ethics and moralities of things such as physical discipline with other like-minded peers, which allows them a healthier environment to grow, expand their mindset, and potentially consider using alternative ways of correction rather than physical punishment. Data shows that parents with higher education levels and those who start families later are significantly less likely to use physical discipline. Higher education often provides parents with an alternative conflict resolution script (Cody-Rydzewski, 2026). Additionally, adults who create their families later on in life are also more prepared when they have children, have more stable jobs and stable income, and have also matured and developed mentally at a further point than an individual who has children as a teen or young adult. This ties into economic pressure and discipline because the disparities further sharpen by economic factors.

Families facing systemic financial instability often resort to physical correction as a high-speed response to stress. Because they feel constant worry about their basic needs such as food on the table and a roof over their head, they don't have as much time to engage with their children for a length of time. They don't have the means to find alternative options when a child is especially misbehaving, such as therapy or school counseling. So they often resort to the fast-acting method of corporal punishment and tend to do it more as well because they are in those stressful situations more significantly than families of a higher economic status. Relative economic security allows for more time-intensive verbal discipline. Research shows that physical discipline is more prevalent in these high-stress, lower-income environments because poverty increases parental allostatic load, which is essentially chronic stress, which makes them focus on quick physical compliance rather than long-term reasoning. This transition represents a broader cultural evolution, where the social capital of the next generation is no longer built through physical endurance but through the emotional regulation and negotiation skills favored in the modern workforce (Straus, 1996). As the economy moved from manual labor to service and tech negotiation, the correction of children followed suit. Parents began socializing children for a world where verbal skill, not physical toughness, was the path to success. No longer was the speed at which one could hunt down an animal or the physical strength of making it through harsh weather conditions the epitome of manhood or a dutiful wife. Now the gender roles and expectations shifted to having stronger social skills, understanding manners, being a better communicator, and knowing how to work in a team.

Ultimately the shift away from corporal punishment is not merely a moral trend but a socio-economic realignment that mirrors a parent's own access to education and economic stability. Those who are spanked are more likely to hit their own kids unless interrupted by a higher education (Cody-Rydzewski, 2026). Education is the literal interrupter of the generational cycle. Education functions as a primary interrupter of generational trauma by fundamentally reframing the parents' perception of conflict, shifting the focus from the immediate suppression of behavior to the long-term cultivation of the child's executive function. It's essentially cognitive reframing. Education provides parents with this cognitive complexity. Instead of seeing a child's defiance as a personal attack requiring a physical defense and an act of disrespect or meanness from the child, educated parents are more likely to view it as a developmental milestone requiring a teaching moment.

An example of this may be if a child steals something from a store. A parent who has not necessarily experienced as much education is more likely to simply react to that misbehavior with a grabbing of the wrist or a spank on the back for the kid, hoping for that quick response and that quick fix of the issue simply because a child has not adhered to the social moral code. Whereas a parent who is more educated and has more experience in cognitive reframing is more likely to take the moment and see the bigger picture. They're more likely to understand that the child stealing an item might have stemmed from something different. Maybe the child was hungry, felt neglected in wants of theirs, felt some sort of social pressure to get the same thing as their peers. Those parents take a moment to explore the reasoning why the child did the misbehavior and are more inclined to talk through it with the child as opposed to simply getting that quick fix and resorting to physical correction.

By expanding a parent's rhetorical and emotional toolbox, higher education reduces the stress of caregiving, making physical force an unnecessary and obsolete tool in a more sophisticated pedagogical method. In the JAMA study, maltreatment often occurs when a parent runs out of words (Afifi et al., 2019). They no longer see the point in trying to communicate with the child why they did something wrong or why they should never repeat it. Education acts as a buffer by providing a larger vocabulary of non-physical consequences, such as time-outs, loss of privileges, and inductive reasoning.

The shift reflects a broader economic realignment as the modern workforce increasingly rewards collaborative negotiation over blind physical obedience. This is shown in workers' unions becoming more stabilized and active feedback loops within companies, where each and every worker feels empowered to share their opinion and bring about a change if necessary. The use of corporal punishment becomes a socio-economic disadvantage, hindering the very traits required for upward mobility, such as confidence in one's self and the ability to trust others. Furthermore the correlation between delayed parenthood and reduced physical discipline suggests that biological and emotional maturity provide the necessary patience to bridge the gap between a child's transgression and a constructive response. The study notes that those who wait to have children are less likely to hit (Afifi et al., 2019). This suggests that life course maturity allows parents to develop the impulse control they are trying to teach their own children. Oftentimes a parent themselves who is under a lot of stress may lack in as much impulse control and find themselves committing similar acts to the children that they are so inclined to punish in the first place.

Ultimately the interruption of the generational cycle is an act of intellectual rebellion, where the parent consciously chooses scientific efficacy over historical tradition to safeguard the child's future social integration, as opposed to the child's present behavior. Without education the default is the history—Sumeria, Puritans. Education introduces evidence-based parenting, replacing traditional folklore with scientific data like the JAMA study (Afifi et al., 2019).

06Legal Status and Data Analysis

While the historical and religious justifications for corporal punishment focused on the survival of the soul or the child's social safety, modern research has shifted the lens toward the survival of the brain itself. Today nearly 90% of children still experience some form of physical discipline, but the neural evidence suggests this tradition comes at a steep biological cost (Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016).

This biological reality stands in stark contrast to the American legal system. While the landmark 1968 case Jackson v. Bishop successfully argued that corporal punishment in prisons was a cruel and unusual violation of the Eighth Amendment, this protection was notoriously withheld from children (Jackson v. Bishop, 1968). In the 1977 case Ingraham v. Wright, the Supreme Court upheld the use of corporal punishment in schools, leaning on the in loco parentis doctrine to grant educators the same disciplinary authority as parents (Ingraham v. Wright, 1977). The legal loophole of the in loco parentis doctrine ensures that in many regions—particularly the southern United States, where biblical literalism often provides a cultural scaffolding for the practice—physical correction remains a sanctioned institution. Thousands of kids today are still exposed to physical correction in their school systems. The broader issue with this lies not fully in the ethos of physical teaching on kids but also in the reasoning as to why they're being exposed to that treatment. The reasoning was often: 63% violence, aggression, and bullying, while 37% was minor misbehavior, disrespect, and cell phone use. Some were even for dress code violations, sleeping, or even simply talking back to a teacher. Corporal punishment usage is unrelated to the severity of the situation or rule violation frequency. There is no established system for why corporal punishment would be administered or how many times it would be. Additionally, Black children were starkly more likely to face it than white children in these states, and boys were more likely to experience it than girls. Black male students were at the highest risk, disproportionately, of experiencing corporal punishment.

Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) protects children from all forms of physical or mental violence, and yet it is legal in 19 states and 160,000 children are subject to it each year. Disabled youth are also disproportionately punished through methods such as hitting, paddling, spanking, slapping, or any other physical force simply as a means of discipline. A Society for Adolescent Medicine study stated that between 10,000 and 20,000 students need medical attention due to corporal punishment each year (Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016). US Education Secretary Miguel Cardona states that schools should be safe places where all students and educators interact in positive ways that foster students' growth, belonging, and dignity, not places that teach or excavate violence and fear.

Robin McNarr, a fifth-grade teacher from 1992, responded to the school's urging and acceptance of corporal punishment by stating, "I wonder why I thought doing this would stop him from being a child." This brings us back to the overall understanding that at this young age, kids are often more inclined to be curious about the world and engage in risky behavior, which only gets higher during their adolescent years and only tends to ebb down once they're hitting that 21 to 25 mark and their frontal lobe finally begins to mature fully.

Kids are put in multiple situations in schools where they may be tempted to engage in maladaptive misbehaviors, such as peer pressure, the grading system, aiming for academic perfection, and fights amongst each other. School is essentially a breeding ground for misbehaviors. In an institution with such a consistent flow of misbehaviors, it can be easy to choose the faster-acting option of a quick physical punishment to aim to end the misbehavior immediately; however, the long-term effect should be considered and understood. It is a better practice when a child is talked to and reasoned with so that the behavior is fixed not only for the next day, but for the rest of that child's life.

Essentially, the intergenerational transmission of this practice, where parents who are hit as children are statistically more likely to repeat the cycle, reveals a deep cultural inertia. However, as the research indicates, education acts as the primary interrupter by providing parents with the cognitive tools to choose scientific efficacy over historical tradition (Cody-Rydzewski, 2026). The cycle can be broken when moving from an era where hands were used to beat the devil out or ensure survival in a hostile world to one where the evidence demands we prioritize the neural integrity and psychological safety of the child.