A recent UK study of 10,000 children shows that children with a consistent bedtime are significantly less likely to misbehave, while children with erratic bedtimes “demonstrate symptoms similar to jet lag” and are prone to disobedience. Well, duh.

Anyone who’s raised kids knows this. Kids need sleep. Kids need consistency. Kids need a schedule that allows their little bodies and minds to adapt to a consistent rhythm. Growing up without a regular and predictable schedule “induces a state of body and mind akin to jet lag and this matters for healthy development and daily functioning,” observes one of the study’s authors. “It follows that disruptions to sleep, especially if they occur at key times in development, could have important lifelong impacts on health.”

So what should parents do? Well, of course, they should regiment their lives in order to get their kids on a consistent schedule. Which will mean sacrifice on their part. Those new parents who have recently declined their friends’ invitation for drinks at 9 because their toddler needs to be in bed by 7 know exactly what I’m talking about. Having kids changes your life. You make sacrifices for the good of your children. And sometimes those sacrifices are significant.

But we live in a culture of self-worship, where nothing must interrupt your right to utter and total self-determination. So the authors of this study go out of their way to reassure parents who are already doing the math in their heads and lamenting their lost freedom. “Family routines can be difficult to maintain when parents are working long and potentially unsociable hours,” they write. “Thus policy development is needed to better support families to provide conditions in which young children can flourish.” Rest assured that in the wake of feminism and individualism, the “policy development” in question won’t include encouraging parents to work less, pay off debt and reduce their income needs, and make economic and career sacrifices for the sake of their children. Rather, the policy wonks will propose more government intervention, more company-sponsored daycares, more nanny-state bureaucracy.

But, you ask: how do I know this? Isn’t this just inflammatory rhetoric? Aren’t I guilty of reactionism, conservatism, fundamentalism, and whatever other -isms are currently unfashionable? Aren’t I prognosticating rather confidently about a future that remains in flux?

Maybe. I guess it’s possible that the academic and political taste-makers could suddenly begin to affirm mothers choosing to stay at home during their kids’ formative years. I guess it’s possible that advertisers and credit card companies could encourage couples to consume less, live more simply, and incur less debt. I guess it’s possible that public opinion could sway back toward the stable nuclear family, where kids have a predictable bedtime routine, not to mention predictable mealtimes and predictable family rhythms and predictable gender roles.

But it’s not likely.

So, moms and dads: I’ll go ahead and tell you what no one else will tell you. You’ve been entrusted with little human beings made in the image of God. The most significant thing you’ll ever do in life will be the shaping, training, forming, and raising of these eternal souls. The Bible, common sense, and social science all tell you that the rhythms you build into them right now will affect their development and their flourishing. So don’t disdain the little things. Achieving a regular bedtime doesn’t seem like a huge parenting triumph. In fact, it will feel pretty… routine. But according to the research, it’s anything but.

What’s more, not disdaining the little things means taking stock of bigger things – things like budgets and work schedules and life goals and career decisions. Consider this your encouragement toward a little family “policy development.” Are your life decisions creating “conditions in which young children can flourish?” God and future generations are going to praise or blame you – not Miss Maggie’s Daycare or Neighborhood Public School – for how your kids turn out.

“A wise son makes a glad father, but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother” (Proverbs 10:1).

A recent study sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics claims that “children who are spanked by their parents are at greater risk for later problems.” The study asserts that children who are spanked score lower on vocabulary tests and are more likely to be aggressive and break rules at school. The glaring weakness in the research – and in its reporting in the popular media – is that its definition of “spanking” is wide enough to drive a truck through.

Those who hold to spanking as a form of biblical discipline are well acquainted with this problem. The word has a semantic range as large as the national debt. It’s commonly used to refer to any form of physical discipline – whether the one administering it is a loving and godly parent or an alcoholic rage-monster, and whether the tool used is a hand, a wooden spoon, or a fraternity paddle. So as we assess the merits of a study like this one, we must be careful to define terms. And because the study’s authors failed to do that, their conclusions are spurious.

The biblical form of discipline advocated by many Christian parents is categorically different from what many people envision when they hear the word “spanking.” To many, the term connotes an angry parent who’s “had it up to here” with some unruly kids. She’s exhausted her regimen of I’m-counting-to-three and go-to-your-room and if-you-don’t-obey-right-now-you’ll-regret-it. In exasperation or maybe even violent aggression, she grabs her child, throws him over her knee, and administers a lashing to his backside, resulting in loud wails and a momentary reprieve from rebellion before the cycle begins again. And this is the more serene version. In extreme cases, the word “spanking” is co-opted by parents who are downright physically abusive and want a culturally acceptable term under which to hide their wicked behavior.

Will children who are spanked in this way grow up to be a) more aggressive and b) less verbal? You bet they will. Does the Christian version of spanking – biblical discipline – bear any resemblance to this picture? Hardly. To be sure, it does involve a parent using physical means to discipline and train a child. But in motive, in method, in means, and in outcome, it is something else entirely.

Therefore, any research study that asks a general question about “spanking” – without further clarification or explanation – is likely to generate disparate results that muddy the picture rather than making it clear. And that’s exactly what happened in this study. The researchers asked parents one simple question: “In the past month, have you spanked (child) because (he/she) was misbehaving or acting up?” This query fails to discern the respondents’ actual practice of spanking. The only thing we know is that all 1933 families studied used some form of physical discipline. We have no idea whether they beat their children in anger or lovingly disciplined them in obedience to Scripture. And it’s the HOW of spanking, not the WHAT, that makes the difference.

At the very least, this study is guilty of poor method. At the most, it may reflect an attempt to manipulate the data to sway public opinion against spanking. The report’s authors reveal their bias in the first paragraph: “Corporal punishment remains a widely endorsed parenting tool in US families, and the United States stands out as one of the few high-income countries that have not followed Sweden’s lead in banning spanking. This is despite the warnings of the American Academy of Pediatrics about the potentially deleterious effects of spanking…” Welcome to the “objectivity” of modern social science.

In the face of such prejudiced research, Christian parents need to remain resolute in their commitment to biblical discipline. The academic elite will continue to publish dubious studies that reinforce their foregone conclusions. The media will continue to seize upon sensational stories of abusers who defend their actions under the rubric of “spanking.” And activists will continue to rack up miles on their Volvos as they lobby for the US to be more like Sweden. Meanwhile, Christian children will continue to grow up respectful, submissive, and self-controlled due to the proper and biblical use of spanking. And that’s what will win the day in the end.

In the meantime, expect to have lots of terse conversations with friends, in-laws, and babysitters who can’t believe that you – [gasp] – spank your children. And who can’t understand how they could still be smart and well-behaved.

[If this post raises questions you'd like to explore further, consider joining us for the Raising Godly Kids conference, where we'll talk about this and much more.]

Christian theism is true Truth. It’s not just true “for people who are into that sort of thing;” it’s true for everyone in every place at every time. Which means that what God says about child-raising is not merely a valid “perspective” on how to raise children. It’s how children are intended by their Creator to be raised. Because of common grace, those who don’t worship and love and serve the Creator can still access and apply Truth and reap the benefits. But those who ignore the Truth do so at their own peril, and their children’s. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction” (Proverbs 1:7).

When it comes to parenting, there are three particular Truths – realities about how things ARE – that postmodern psychology explicitly rejects. Because of this, those who look to the culture for instruction about parenting will find their children worse off, not better.

Truth #1: Innocence Is Already Lost. Human beings are created in the image of God – and are therefore to be honored, valued, and prized as the pinnacle of God’s good creation (Genesis 1:26-30). And at the same time, humans are deeply flawed, sinners by nature and choice (Psalm 51:5, Romans 3:10). This means that children MUST be raised with an awareness of both their dignity and their depravity. Your little baby is not an innocent little cherub. She is a natural-born sinner who temporarily lacks sufficient strength and opportunity (both of which will come soon enough). The culture, committed as it is to the Enlightenment narrative, WILL NOT honestly engage the reality of original sin – despite the clear evidence every 2-year-old provides. And so well-meaning parents continue to reason with 2-year-olds as if they were rational adults, and continue to reap the resultant chaos.

Truth #2: Children Must Be Under Authority. Authority is good, not bad. It is essential to human flourishing (1 Peter 2:13-17). When it comes to the family, parents are endowed by God with authority – and they must use it. To be sure, parents are sinful authorities, flawed authorities, authorities in need of grace and repentance (see #1). But their fallenness does not absolve them from their responsibility. Children are to be under authority (Ephesians 6:1-3). Parents are to be honored and obeyed (Exodus 20:12). The cultural elites cannot and will not affirm parental authority, because they have rejected the ultimate authority (God’s) and therefore have no framework for legitimate human authority. But common sense tells us that the answer to bad government is good government, not anarchy. The gospel and the Scriptures provide both the principles and the power for good government in the home.

Truth #3: Virtue Matters. Every parent’s goal should be to raise a virtuous child. A just society requires virtuous people; and society begins to unravel when people begin to “call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20). Again, due to the reality of common grace, Christian theism is not the sole arbiter of virtue; most classical societies had a cohesive vision of morality that closely paralleled the teachings of Jesus. But as Alasdair MacIntyre showed in his seminal work After Virtue, the classical consensus has fragmented. We now live in a post-virtue society that has lost all capacity for ethical reasoning. And so modern parenting has no center – no agreed-upon “north star” of human personhood to orient the shaping and formation of children. “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25). Because the cultural elites who wax eloquent about parenting are confused about virtue, their advice breeds more confusion. “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed” (John 3:20).

Because Truth is true, it works. If you’ll reckon honestly with your child’s inner depravity, exercise firm but loving authority, and seek to shape virtuous character, you’ll raise a relatively healthy, well-adjusted adult who is a blessing to society. That doesn’t mean she’ll be converted – the Holy Spirit must see to that. But you must do your job, and let God do His.

In our modern era, no one questions the authority of the experts. But someone should. Because when it comes to parenting, the one thing the experts lack is expertise.

We are surrounded by a bevy of academics – psychologists, sociologists, educational consultants – who have researched legions of children. They attend conferences about the development of children. They write studies about children. The one thing they often haven’t done is to raise children. Which makes it hard to be an expert.

The word expertise speaks of prowess, proficiency, competence. Which means that the true experts in child-raising are those who have actually raised children well. Most of these people don’t write books or speak at conferences. They’re too busy reading with their kids or building Lego towers with their grandkids.

But wait – isn’t it taboo to talk of raising children well? If it’s possible to raise them well… doesn’t that lead to the conclusion that it’s also possible to be incompetent as a parent? Answer: Have you ever seen a 4-year-old collapse in a heap on the grocery store floor while his mother tries to cajole and bribe him? ‘Nuff said.

The academic-style “experts” came to prominence in the 1950s and 60s. We are now two-going-on-three generations deep into the social experiment they championed – not quite enough distance to mark its demise, but enough to recognize where it’s trending. Ask yourself: do we live in a more courteous, civil, and virtuous society than we did 50 years ago? No? God forbid that we’d step back and ask what got us here.

Any teacher, day care staffer, or social worker knows what’s changed. Raising children used to be the primary job of parents – a job reinforced by societal expectation. Society (schools, families, neighborhoods) expected children to behave, and frowned upon children who didn’t. Respect, courtesy, and obedience was the norm. Did this mean every kid was respectful and obedient? Of course not. Were some kids forced to behave by overbearing and authoritarian parents who lacked love and gentleness? Sure, just like some athletes are forced to perform by overbearing and authoritative coaches, and some grad students are forced to re-write their theses by overbearing and authoritative professors. But we must not confound the what with the how. It’s possible to achieve the proper what (a respectful and obedient kid, a premier athlete, a top-notch thesis) with an improper how (harsh parenting, coaching, or advising). The obvious answer is to repair the how. Instead, the child-psychology “experts” created a whole new problem by rejecting the what.

Buoyed by the work of key figures like Sigmund Freud and Benjamin Spock, academic “experts” began to assert that children should not be raised in an environment of authority and discipline, but rather in an environment of permissiveness and “positive self-esteem.” They should pursue individual self-expression rather than being expected to conform to behavioral norms. And parents, too – especially mothers – should bow the knee to Almighty Individualism, pursuing their own career goals rather than settling for the old-fashioned role of raising children.

As a result, child-rearing has largely become the job of teachers and daycare providers and government institutions. Parents have outsourced the task of parenting – partly because of their own apathy and confusion, and partly because of the government’s creeping incursion into the family. And the results speak for themselves. Our culture desperately needs parents to return to the high calling of parenthood.

And that won’t happen by consulting the academic “experts.” Rather, it will come by seeking mentors and models who have actually raised good children. Virtuous ones. Courageous ones. Respectful ones. Kids you enjoy being around. They’re out there. Go find them. Their parents are the true experts you should be listening to.

For all my fellow leaders who are taking risks, striving and erring and spending yourselves in a worthy cause… may you be inspired by these memorable words from one of America’s most courageous leaders.

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

- from Teddy Roosevelt’s speech “Citizenship In A Republic,” delivered at the Sorbonne in Paris, France on 23 April, 1910