12/03/2025
It feels like my social media has become the front line in the final desperate defense of dog trainers clinging to their right to physically punish the public’s dogs, without admitting the damage they’re causing. This isn’t training; it’s the ghost of a toxic culture still normalizing abuse as discipline.
There’s already a powerful historical precedent demonstrating exactly where this path inevitably leads.
Consider the American Psychological Association: in 1975, they officially opposed corporal punishment in schools and institutional settings. Initially cautious, their stance evolved with decades of research, driven by overwhelming evidence that physical punishment of children results in significant harm, including increased aggression, anxiety, and long-term psychological damage.
These findings are strikingly similar to what current research tells us about dog training methods (that using discomfort to teach is counterproductive and unnecessary). https://www.zakgeorge.com/general-5
By the early 2000s, landmark studies, notably Elizabeth Gershoff’s extensive meta-analyses, conclusively demonstrated that corporal punishment had long-lasting negative impacts.
These findings countered the most common arguments for spanking, including claims that:
“I was spanked, and I turned out fine.”
“Mild spanking isn’t harmful if done correctly.”
“Physical punishment is necessary when other methods fail.”
But research clearly showed that even occasional, mild physical punishment can escalate, creating an atmosphere of fear and anxiety rather than respect and understanding.
It impairs trust and damages relationships, teaching children that violence is an acceptable means of resolving conflict.
This “line” between mild and harsh punishment was never clear, often leading to serious unintended consequences.
Ultimately, by 2019, the APA adopted a zero-tolerance stance against all corporal punishment of children, aligning itself explicitly with decades of rigorous science and a significant shift in societal attitudes toward more humane and effective discipline methods.
Dogs, like children, learn best through trust, safety, and clear communication, not the fear of a pronged leash pop or a neck shock, pain, or coercion.
“But dogs and children are different!”, I can hear aversive trainers typing frantically below.
What they don’t seem to know: The fundamental psychology of learning doesn’t change across species; harming a learner in the name of teaching is abuse, whether the learner is a child or a dog.
The parallels with dog training today are undeniable. Historically, dog training methods were similarly rooted in outdated dominance theories that advocated physical force and aversive techniques, methods that experts now know create fear, anxiety, and aggressive behavior.
Yet today, trainers advocating punishment continue making similar flawed arguments: they cite anecdotal evidence, insist mild punishment doesn’t cause lasting harm, or justify harsh methods as necessary to handle difficult behaviors, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary.
Like the American Psychological Association, organizations like the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (AVSAB) have echoed the APA’s stance by advocating against aversive methods.
Veterinary behaviorists have demonstrated, through rigorous science, that corporal punishment in dog training create the very issues they claim to resolve.
Positive reinforcement and neuro affirming approaches which prioritize the emotional state of the animals we work with is not merely ethically superior; it’s scientifically supported to be objectively more effective without the welfare concerns.
Let me be very clear: our advocacy isn’t about dictating how guardians choose to raise their dogs. However, we are unapologetically committed to holding dog training “PROFESSIONALS” accountable.
We refuse to stand by silently while you the public are sold outdated methods that continue to harm dogs and undermine the bond between dogs and people.
The same toxic culture that once normalized violence and coercion as "discipline" is now urging you, the public, to shock your dogs or jerk them around by metal collars in the name of training.
Sources:
American Psychological Association (1975) – Resolution on Corporal Punishment in Schools and Other Institutions retrieved from http://www.apa.org/about/policy/corporal-punishment.aspx
Gershoff, E.T. (2002) – Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-1284539.pdf
Gershoff, E.T., & Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2016) – Spanking and Child Outcomes: Old Controversies and New Meta-Analyses https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7992110/
American Psychological Association (2019) – Resolution on Physical Discipline of Children by Parentshttps://www.apa.org/about/policy/physical-discipline.pdf
American Academy of Pediatrics (2018) – Policy Statement: Effective Discipline to Raise Healthy Children https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/142/6/e20183112/37452/Effective-Discipline-to-Raise-Healthy-Children
American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior (2021) – Position Statement on Humane Dog Traininghttps://avsab.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/AVSAB-Humane-Dog-Training-Position-Statement-2021.pdf
