New studies say spanking lowers IQ

September 28, 9:48 AMMinneapolis Attachment Parenting ExaminerAlicia Bayer

Two new studies released last week show a link between spanking and lower IQ in children.

Both studies were headed by discipline and domestic violence expert Murray Straus, a professor of sociology and co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire.

In the first, Straus surveyed 17,000 college students in 32 countries and found that "the higher the percent of parents who used corporal punishment, the lower the national average IQ."

The second study, which is being published in the Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, looked at spanking just in the United States. Straus and a fellow researcher reviewed data on IQ scores of about 1,500 young children.

Of 2- to 4-year-olds, children who were spanked had IQ scores about five points lower than those who weren't spanked at all. Spanking among 5- to 9-year-olds led to a loss of about 3 points.

According to Straus, how often parents spanked made a difference. "The more spanking, the slower the development of the child's mental ability. But even small amounts of spanking made a difference."

In a statement about his research, Straus said:

"It is time for psychologists to recognize the need to help parents end the use of corporal punishment and incorporate that objective into their teaching and clinical practice. It also is time for the United States to begin making the advantages of not spanking a public health and child welfare focus, and eventually enact federal no-spanking legislation."

For information on 130 other studies that showed negative effects of corporal punishment, see E.T. Gershoff's Report on Physical Punishment in the United States.

The Aware Parenting Institute also offers 20 alternatives to spanking.

CDC Says Cesarean Triples Neonatal Death Risk

by Misha Sanfranski
While the increased risks of cesarean section to neonatal and maternal health have long been known, an even more grim issue came to light in a study released in the September, 2006 issue of Birth Journal. The CDC conducted research on cesarean section and neonatal mortality, expecting to
Costumes | Party Ideas | Kids and Safety | Movies and Music | Scary Stories | More »
find that the neonatal mortality rate (defined as death within the first 28 days of life) following cesarean section correlated directly with medical complications of the mother and baby. What they found, instead, was that regardless of risk factors, babies born by cesarean section face a risk of death nearly three times that of vaginally born babies.

MacDorman, et al. analyzed national birth and death data for 5,762,037 live infants and 11,897 neonatal deaths, for the years 1998-2001. The purpose of the study was to examine the neonatal outcomes of primary cesarean delivery in women who had no other known complications or medical risk factors. The logical result of this examination would seem to be comparable neonatal mortality rates among cesarean and vaginally born infants. In fact, what the results show is that cesarean independently raises the risk of neonatal death by almost three-fold - .62 per 1000 deaths among vaginal births versus 1.77 per 1000 infant deaths among cesarean babies.

Even more astounding than the simple fact that cesarean section raises the risk of infant death - regardless of the reason the cesarean was performed - is that even when the researchers adjusted for sociodemographic, medical and congenital factors, and removed infants with APGARs under 4, the risk of death was only reduced "moderately". A stark difference in the death rates between cesarean born infants and vaginally born infants remained even with no medical explanation.

We aren't talking about babies dying from the few, rare complications that can arise in childbirth. We're talking about healthy, low-risk mothers electing for a primary cesarean section with no medical indication resulting in a nearly three times higher rate of death than those who have a vaginal birth.

According to Marian MacDorman, the CDC's study leader, "These findings should be of concern for clinicians and policymakers who are observing the rapid growth in the number of primary Caesareans to mothers without a medical indication."

While the findings of this research on cesarean and neonatal mortality were reported by major media outlets upon its release, publicity for the issue quickly waned. It is evident that care providers and mothers have continued to discount the disturbing results of the CDC study on neonatal
Costumes | Party Ideas | Kids and Safety | Movies and Music | Scary Stories | More »
mortality and cesarean, as the rate of surgical delivery has continued to climb to a record-breaking high of 31.8% in 2007, up from 31.1% in 2006.

The World Health Organization recommends no more than a 10% cesarean rate in developed countries, based upon research indicating more harm than good to both mothers and babies when the cesarean rate tops 15%. Until mothers and obstetricians start taking the risks of elective cesarean section seriously, we will likely continue to see tragic consequences of the interference of surgery in childbirth.

References:

MacDorman MF, Declercq E, Menacker F, Malloy MH.

Division of Vital Statistics, NationalCenter for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

Hyattsville, Maryland20782, USA. Birth. 2006 Sep;33(3):175-82.

H1N1 Vaccination