Many of the Presidents have counseled against hitting kids: Church magazines: You have said that your father never laid a hand on any of his children when disciplining them. 4 President Hinckley: That’s right. I don’t believe that children need to be beaten, or anything of that kind. Children can be disciplined with love. They can be counseled—if parents would take the time to sit down quietly and talk with them. Tell them the consequences of misbehaving, of not doing things in the right way. The children would be better off, and I think everyone would be happier. My father never touched us. He had a wisdom all his own of quietly talking with us. He turned us around when we were moving in the wrong direction, without beating us or taking a strap to us or any of that kind of business. I’ve never been a believer in the physical punishment of children. I don’t think it is necessary. Church magazines: Sister Hinckley, you have said that “you don’t teach a child not to hit by hitting.” 5 From At Home With the Hinckleys I have never accepted the principle of “spare the rod and spoil the child.” I will be forever grateful for a father who never laid a hand in anger upon his children. Somehow he had the wonderful talent to let them know what was expected of them and to give them encouragement in achieving it. I am persuaded that violent fathers produce violent sons. I am satisfied that such punishment in most instances does more damage than good. Children don’t need beating. They need love and encouragement. They need fathers to whom they can look with respect rather than fear. Above all, they need example. I recently read a biography of George H. Brimhall, who at one time served as president of Brigham Young University. Concerning him, someone said that he reared “his boys with a rod, but it [was] a fishing rod” (Raymond Brimhall Holbrook and Esther Hamilton Holbrook, TheTall Pine Tree: The Life and Work of George H. Brimhall, n.p., 1988, p. 62). That says it all. From Save the Children, Gordon B. Hinckley It is not by the whip or the rod that we can make obedient children; but it is by faith and by prayer, and by setting a good example before them “She might have whipped him and injured him, as a great many others would have done; but if they know what to do, they can correct the child without violence” Chastening may be necessary, … but parents should govern their children by faith rather than by the rod Although it is written that, “The rod and reproof give wisdom; but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame [Proverbs 29:15],” and, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes [Proverbs 13:24];” these quotations refer to … wise and prudent corrections. Children who have lived in the sunbeams of parental kindness and affection, when made aware of a parent’s displeasure, and receive a kind reproof from parental lips, are more thoroughly chastened than by any physical punishment that could be applied to their persons (DNW, 7 Dec. 1864, 2). Instead of being behind with the whip, always be in advance, then you can say, “Come along,” and you will have no use for the rod. From Brigham Young, Parental Responsibility Use no lash and no violence against them Joseph F. Smith, Wrongful Road of Abuse There are scores and scores more, but if this doesn't affirm what your conscience already knows, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still"
