NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070119/lf_afp/uspoliticschildren_070119202053

LOS ANGELES (AFP) - A California lawmaker says she has proposed a law that would make spanking a small child a crime to be punished by jail time or a fine.

The bill, backed by Democrat Sally Lieber of San Francisco, a member of the state legislature, would outlaw spanking children three years old or younger and carry a possible penalty of jail time or a 1,000-dollar fine.

You can't spank for three and under, but as soon as the brat turns four, he's getting a whuppin'.

Seriously, where does the line get drawn?

Apologies if this topic has already been posted.

Make the limit based on how much of the hand can be used.

For small children use just the fingers!

I don't think people should ever spank their kids.

That bill is stupid, i understand saying no EXCESSIVE spanking (like leaving horrible bruising etc) but no spanking altogether?? A child under 3 probably wont understand you trying to explain why something is wrong, like "Dont run out on to that road, you will get hurt". What they do understand is a small amount of pain.

I don't think people should ever spank their kids.

How nice.


That aside, I'ma go with "That bill is stupid".

This just represents how left wing nut jobs want to control everything that is done. No wonder the 9th "Circus" court is located there. If it were not for a Republican gov California would be bankrupt and in the dark. This just represents the policies of nancy pelosi and how left wing she really is.

I don't care if there is a law.

When/If I have children, I will spank them from the time that their rears can handle it.

When he was very young, my brother was trying to stick a paper clip in an electrical socket. My dad took the paper clip from him, put him on the other side of the room, and told him no. My brother got something else and went back over to the socket. My dad took it away, moved him, and again to him no.

This went two or three more times. The last time, my father gave him a firm smack on the butt. He never tried to stick anything into the socket again.

I don't think people should ever spank their kids.

I see that the 'tards have spoken.

I suppose you don't think that kids should ever be punished but instead should be lavished and showered with lollipops and extra large tins of forstings even if they skin the dog alive.

I bet you also believe that failing grades in school should be outlawed.

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.

why does the government need to be involved in the way people raise their children?

The government alreadyi s involved in a huge way, on the federal, state and local level with school lunch programs, funding for education, etc.

Moron.:upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours:

I don't think people should ever spank their kids.

Do you think spanking ought to be illegal?

anyone up for seeing a generation thats more out of control then the previous?

the bill is stupid. why does the government need to be involved in the way people raise their children?

I have to agree with this bill, because I'm of the mind that very young children (and most animals as well) don't understand why they're being struck. If a parent is doing his or her job (barring any mental disorder, retardation, etc.), then he or she can use simple psychological conditioning methods to encourage good behavior, thus eliminating the need for corporal punishment. (Example: Instead of smacking the kid, yell "NO!" -- Loud noises will generally distract a child or animal from what they are doing, at least long enough for you to intervene.)

You're right that a parent should be able to control their offspring without resorting to physical violence. I find your choice of words interesting, though. "Psychological conditioning"? I guess kids aren't covered by the Geneva Convention, are they?

I don't care if there is a law.

When/If I have children, I will spank them from the time that their rears can handle it.

When he was very young, my brother was trying to stick a paper clip in an electrical socket. My dad took the paper clip from him, put him on the other side of the room, and told him no. My brother got something else and went back over to the socket. My dad took it away, moved him, and again to him no.

This went two or three more times. The last time, my father gave him a firm smack on the butt. He never tried to stick anything into the socket again.

maybe your dad should have better child proofed the house?

I see that the 'tards have spoken.

I suppose you don't think that kids should ever be punished but instead should be lavished and showered with lollipops and extra large tins of forstings even if they skin the dog alive.

I bet you also believe that failing grades in school should be outlawed.

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.
wow.


Do you think spanking ought to be illegal?

I don't know, it's murky water. I am going to say now, that I don't think it should be, just because, that's what I think today.

anyone up for seeing a generation thats more out of control then the previous?

the bill is stupid. why does the government need to be involved in the way people raise their children?

I'm not sure about the out of control part, but yeah, the bill is silly. And unenforceable, too, more to the point. But hey, state legislators need something to do, right?

I have to agree with this bill, because I'm of the mind that very young children (and most animals as well) don't understand why they're being struck. If a parent is doing his or her job (barring any mental disorder, retardation, etc.), then he or she can use simple psychological conditioning methods to encourage good behavior, thus eliminating the need for corporal punishment. (Example: Instead of smacking the kid, yell "NO!" -- Loud noises will generally distract a child or animal from what they are doing, at least long enough for you to intervene.)

This just represents how left wing nut jobs want to control everything that is done. No wonder the 9th "Circus" court is located there. If it were not for a Republican gov California would be bankrupt and in the dark. This just represents the policies of nancy pelosi and how left wing she really is.

Where else would the 9th circuit court be located? You make no sense do they "locate" circuit courts based on demographics?

The government alreadyi s involved in a huge way, on the federal, state and local level with school lunch programs, funding for education, etc.

Moron.:upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours:

And your post earns your side zero credibility.

The finger smiley is pointless and does nothing to strengthen your lame argument.

I fervently disagree with this bill. People should be allowed to spank their kids. Most kids need it. That half-assed nonsense just doesn't work. Kids need discipline. More, they need trauma. It builds character. In fact, kids need to be put through a brutal but necessary Darwinian gauntlet of pain in which only the strong survive, because that is what the world needs for its future. Not a bunch of softies who'll fall apart at the first sign of stress.

satire is funny........

This just represents how left wing nut jobs want to control everything that is done. No wonder the 9th "Circus" court is located there. If it were not for a Republican gov California would be bankrupt and in the dark. This just represents the policies of nancy pelosi and how left wing she really is.
http://texasholdemblogger.wordpress.com/files/2006/08/bullshit-o-meter.gif
Because Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the California Assembly and is backing this bill and driving it through the California Legislature, yes?

That said, it should be a parent's choice, so long as it isn't excessive.

I fervently disagree with this bill. People should be allowed to spank their kids. Most kids need it. That half-assed nonsense just doesn't work. Kids need discipline. More, they need trauma. It builds character. In fact, kids need to be put through a brutal but necessary Darwinian gauntlet of pain in which only the strong survive, because that is what the world needs for its future. Not a bunch of softies who'll fall apart at the first sign of stress.

i think if you have to resort to spanking, either you or your child needs psychiatric treatment.

The government alreadyi s involved in a huge way, on the federal, state and local level with school lunch programs, funding for education, etc.

Moron.:upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours:

your going to go far on these forums i can tell everyone is going to like you.

i never said they werent already invovled. my question was why does the government need to be involved in the way people raise their children?

it was not a statement saying "the government is not invovled with the way people raise their children"

I fervently disagree with this bill. People should be allowed to spank their kids. Most kids need it. That half-assed nonsense just doesn't work. Kids need discipline. More, they need trauma. It builds character. In fact, kids need to be put through a brutal but necessary Darwinian gauntlet of pain in which only the strong survive, because that is what the world needs for its future. Not a bunch of softies who'll fall apart at the first sign of stress.

And what do you propose when this trauma, as you put it, becomes excessive? In your philosophy, is it right for parents to ABUSE their children, or maybe even kill them?

EDIT: And what the bloody hell is up with the forum clock?

To quote Denis Leary: I find that I don't have to spank them. I find that waving the gun around pretty much gets the same job done!

And what do you propose when this trauma, as you put it, becomes excessive?

Same thing that happens when it does now: legal prosecution, or nothing.

In your philosophy, is it right for parents to ABUSE their children, or maybe even kill them?

No.

EDIT: And what the bloody hell is up with the forum clock?

Jolt hates us all.

Same thing that happens when it does now: legal prosecution, or nothing.



No.



Jolt hates us all.


Good answers.

maybe your dad should have better child proofed the house?

My brother kept taking those little plastic plug things out.

Sorry, forgot to mention that.

My brother kept taking those little plastic plug things out.

Sorry, forgot to mention that.

maybe your dad should have child proofed the house better or better supervised your brother.

I don't think people should ever spank their kids.

I agree, but you'd be willing to legislate it? It is my belief that legislating personal taste is wrong. There are already laws against abuse as there should be. Why outlaw a minor butt-whooping?

I see that the 'tards have spoken.

I suppose you don't think that kids should ever be punished but instead should be lavished and showered with lollipops and extra large tins of forstings even if they skin the dog alive.

I bet you also believe that failing grades in school should be outlawed.

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.

Watch who you call a tard. Smunkee is a great mother and disciplines her children plenty. She just doesn't believe in spanking and you should respect that as she should respect your right to spank.

I agree, but you'd be willing to legislate it? It is my belief that legislating personal taste is wrong. There are already laws against abuse as there should be. Why outlaw a minor butt-whooping?

I said earlier (somewhere) that the legislation of it is murky water for me, so until I figure it out......I am thinking no.

I see nothing wrong with spanking a child.

Personally speaking:

If there is no serious harm or long-term effects to the child, sometimes spanking is the only option. And "spanking" is a tap on the bottom, not beating your child with a two-by-four.

It is not the government's place to say how you can discipline your child.

I said earlier (somewhere) that the legislation of it is murky water for me, so until I figure it out......I am thinking no.

Indeed, but I didn't read that until after my response due to the lag in the clock system.

Indeed, but I didn't read that until after my response due to the lag in the clock system.

I know, the lag, it drives me insane, I can't even find my own posts half the time.

I see that the 'tards have spoken.

I suppose you don't think that kids should ever be punished but instead should be lavished and showered with lollipops and extra large tins of forstings even if they skin the dog alive.

I bet you also believe that failing grades in school should be outlawed.

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.

http://necroticobsession.com/bb/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gifIt's amazing the anger produced in someone just because his uncle made him touch his "captain winkey" when he was a kid.

What's the matter? Life got you down? Everyone else is out there getting laid and having fun while you're stuck in the basement with your kiddy porn?

It's okay, guy. There are counselors that can help you come to grips with all those memories of laying awake at night, knowing that at anytime your drunk uncle was going to come in to your room and put his "captain winkey" in your "little firehouse." Do you still remember the smell of Whiskey on his breath? Was it JD or did he drink that cheap garage made stuff?

Are you still hurt by the fact that all your first sexual experience had to say to you was, "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" Or was it, "Mooooooo."

Put the peanut butter down and put the dog back in the backyard. Get your fat ass on a treadmill, lose some weight and maybe a little anger over your unfortunate introduction to incest and maybe you can find a sexual partner that can talk and doesn't walk on all fours. ;)

Even if one is completely opposed to spanking, this legislation is utterly ridiculous. Jailtime or a $1000 fine for *any* corporal punishment? Are you kidding me?

Personally speaking:

If there is no serious harm or long-term effects to the child, sometimes spanking is the only option. And "spanking" is a tap on the bottom, not beating your child with a two-by-four.

It is not the government's place to say how you can discipline your child.

your first point is inconsistant with the second point. If I wish to discipline my child by beating him half to death because he spilled his milk, is that my perogative and the government has no say in how I do so?

My two and a half year old daughter needs to be spanked. She understands timeouts, no, and all that jive. She understands most of the things I explain to her and why they're not appropriate, but she's smart enough that she already knows that in order to do whatever the fuck she wants, things might get a little rough from time to time.

However, a five-second burst of violence from her otherwise loving and goofy dad gets the point across far better than all the crybaby talks and time-outs in the world. She's just that kind of person.

I'll modify my initial question. I'm sure she'd learn a whole lot quicker if you beat the shit out of her any time she did something wrong.

Should you do it?

Or, to put it another way, you're the parent, you made the choice to have children, you made the choice to be responsible for those children, why should the law accomodate making it easier for you?

My two and a half year old daughter needs to be spanked. She understands timeouts, no, and all that jive. She understands most of the things I explain to her and why they're not appropriate, but she's smart enough that she already knows that in order to do whatever the fuck she wants, things might get a little rough from time to time.

However, a five-second burst of violence from her otherwise loving and goofy dad gets the point across far better than all the crybaby talks and time-outs in the world. She's just that kind of person.

My two and a half year old daughter needs to be spanked. She understands timeouts, no, and all that jive. She understands most of the things I explain to her and why they're not appropriate, but she's smart enough that she already knows that in order to do whatever the fuck she wants, things might get a little rough from time to time.

However, a five-second burst of violence from her otherwise loving and goofy dad gets the point across far better than all the crybaby talks and time-outs in the world. She's just that kind of person.

she "needs" to be spanked because that is the line you have drawn for her, it's what she understands because that's what you have offered to her.

your first point is inconsistant with the second point. If I wish to discipline my child by beating him half to death because he spilled his milk, is that my perogative and the government has no say in how I do so?

You're right, and thanks for pointing that out.

I'll try to clarify:

If you feel you should discipline your child with a spanking, that's fine. The government should have no say. A spanking usually does not traumatize a child or leave a permanent effect upon the child.

There are already laws in place that outlaw beating your child. So whether you are for it or against it, you're still breaking the law and the police/CPS/DSHS whoever steps in.

I hope that helps. I'm new to the whole debate process. Please don't kill me. :D

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.

Are you the Mayor? :p

A spanking usually does not traumatize a child or leave a permanent effect upon the child.

Probably if the child doesn't have a good memory, or doesn't think too much on matters of the sort.

I can remember the very first spanking I was ever given. I remember it like it was yesterday, and I don't fucking like it.

Hehe. Well, this thread sure is...interesting, to say the least.

spanking is the worst way to teach your child discipline but should it be illegal? no. the enforcement of a law like that would be a nightmare and would do nothing to make childrearing better.

I don't care if there is a law.

When/If I have children, I will spank them from the time that their rears can handle it.

When he was very young, my brother was trying to stick a paper clip in an electrical socket. My dad took the paper clip from him, put him on the other side of the room, and told him no. My brother got something else and went back over to the socket. My dad took it away, moved him, and again to him no.

This went two or three more times. The last time, my father gave him a firm smack on the butt. He never tried to stick anything into the socket again.

Classic rule by fear parenting "strategy" there. Notice how your pop never told him why he shouldn't be sticking the paper clip in the socket. A child is usually going to keep doing something if not given a proper reason for stopping.

Of course, then we have the likes of your dad (as well as mine) who don't give a fuck either way, and think that their parenting methods are set in stone, being the only "proper" way to do things.

Nah. We shouldn't tell our kids that they could fucking die if they do something like that. Just say "no", give no god damn reason, and then smack the shit out of them if they persist.


Don't give me the child-beating bullshit you're espousing, pal. It's not going to make you many friends... Intelligent friends, that is. I suppose you could hang out with the bible-thumping child beaters, if that's your thing.

I am assuming that those who say they support the right of parents to raise their child how they choose aren't the type of people who scream about all the undisciplined kids running about and how their parents need to give them a good whooping.

Don't ask the government to stay out of parents' business if you are not able to do the same.

If nothing else is working, should a parent just keep trying the things that aren't working?

Parenting isn't programming - it's parenting. Children are inviduals and what works for one may or may not work for the next. To assume that a child whom you have never met only responds to spanking because she has been "programmed" that way really doesn't make sense. It is obvious that this parent has tried, and probably uses, a variety of discipline methods - spanking being only one.

I have never seen a kid that wouldn't respond to consistent, intelligent boundaries set by a patient and loving parent. I have seen kids who have been let to push the envelope so much that all a parent is left with is "smack the crap out of them" and even more than that I have seen parents who jump to that first, most of the time they say "my parents spanked me and I turned out okay" which apparently what they mean by "okay" is "I can't figure out how to teach my kids, so I am just going to hit them"

Kids are different for sure, but the saying goes "you teach people how to treat you" and if your kid knows that "the line" is getting spanked, they are going to do whatever it takes to get just shy of it, and when you spank them they think "okay, so that's the line". There is nothing special or magic about hitting a kid, all the kids need to know where the line is, if you can demonstrate that without physical violence aren't you doing a little better than those who can't?

she "needs" to be spanked because that is the line you have drawn for her, it's what she understands because that's what you have offered to her.

If nothing else is working, should a parent just keep trying the things that aren't working?

Parenting isn't programming - it's parenting. Children are inviduals and what works for one may or may not work for the next. To assume that a child whom you have never met only responds to spanking because she has been "programmed" that way really doesn't make sense. It is obvious that this parent has tried, and probably uses, a variety of discipline methods - spanking being only one.

Hehe. Well, this thread sure is...interesting, to say the least.

You usually have to pay for shows like this. :)

If nothing else is working, should a parent just keep trying the things that aren't working?

Parenting isn't programming - it's parenting. Children are inviduals and what works for one may or may not work for the next. To assume that a child whom you have never met only responds to spanking because she has been "programmed" that way really doesn't make sense. It is obvious that this parent has tried, and probably uses, a variety of discipline methods - spanking being only one.

or maybe he should try something that isnt violent.

kids cycle through good and bad behavior on a fairly regular basis. parents who dont understand that freak out when little susie who was an angel at 2 is a demon at 2 1/2. they think that they are doing something wrong when its just a fact of child development and is completely to be expected. he should expect that his daughter will be less cooperative at her age and have a plan to deal with that that doesnt include spanking.

I have never seen a kid that wouldn't respond to consistent, intelligent boundaries set by a patient and loving parent.

I have. My own brother was one of them. Interestingly enough, he didn't respond well to corporal punishment either, although I have seen kids who did. In the end, he didn't respond to much of anything.

I have seen kids who have been let to push the envelope so much that all a parent is left with is "smack the crap out of them" and even more than that I have seen parents who jump to that first, most of the time they say "my parents spanked me and I turned out okay" which apparently what they mean by "okay" is "I can't figure out how to teach my kids, so I am just going to hit them"

Oh, I'm not disputing that there are parents like that. But I don't think that assuming any parent who uses spanking is such a parent.

I can guarrantee you that my parents didn't resort to spanking right off the bat. I can recall once in my life that I was spanked. Once that I was smacked (that was probably more of the situation where he should've stepped back and calmed down first). That's it. With my brother, they tried multiple methods of discipline, but nothing ever really worked.

Kids are different for sure, but the saying goes "you teach people how to treat you" and if your kid knows that "the line" is getting spanked, they are going to do whatever it takes to get just shy of it, and when you spank them they think "okay, so that's the line". There is nothing special or magic about hitting a kid, all the kids need to know where the line is, if you can demonstrate that without physical violence aren't you doing a little better than those who can't?

Some kids don't care where the line is, or what happens when they cross it. Some won't respond to a line set in a certain manner.

If your first resort is to jump to a physical form of discipline then yes, those who find that line elsewhere are doing better. If you try other forms, and find that the physical is all that seems to work, then, no. That parent is doing what works for their children - in other words, parenting.


or maybe he should try something that isnt violent.

Did you not read his post?

Did you not read his post?

yeah i did. several times. he needs to learn some better techniques to deal with a 2.5 year old than 5-second violent outbursts.

she "needs" to be spanked because that is the line you have drawn for her, it's what she understands because that's what you have offered to her.

No. She needs to be spanked because time-outs and talking to's just DO NOT WORK with her. Maybe as she grows older, and we're able to have more in-depth discussions, but for now?

For now she needs to be spanked because the line I drew for her means little in her mind until we reach the line of no-return, and daddy gives her a firm whack on her ass. That is a tangible, memorable experience. If anything, two hours in the corner will only give her the opportunity to plot her next caper.

She's fierce, independant, smarter than a good many adults (Including a number of posters in this thread from what I've seen...), and the thing I'm most proud of in the world. Does this mean I intend to let run run hog-ass wild? No. If anything it means I need to watch her more closely, since I see myself in her and I know how much nonsense I pulled as a kid.

If your kids are weak-willed enough that a talking to and a stint in the corner works, good for you. I'm dealing with a different sort of beast.

Now, just to be clear, it is kind of seeming like I'm taking the 'beat your fucking punk-ass kids' side of this argument. I'm not. It's better to -not- hit your kids, no doubt about it. But there is a fine line here, between being a gentle parent and being lax. I definately believe that one good spanking is worth a hundred time-outs, if it's done at the proper time and with attending teaching.

I have. My own brother was one of them. Interestingly enough, he didn't respond well to corporal punishment either, although I have seen kids who did. In the end, he didn't respond to much of anything.
maybe he had other issues that needed to be addressed?



Oh, I'm not disputing that there are parents like that. But I don't think that assuming any parent who uses spanking is such a parent.
I am pretty anti-physical violence in the home, so I may be biased, you know due to the past violent circumstances I have been in.

I can guarrantee you that my parents didn't resort to spanking right off the bat. I can recall once in my life that I was spanked. Once that I was smacked (that was probably more of the situation where he should've stepped back and calmed down first). That's it. With my brother, they tried multiple methods of discipline, but nothing ever really worked.
I hear that a lot (bold added by me) it usually goes like this

"my kids don't get time out, we tried it once for a few days and they were still the same badness, I hit them once though and they changed, now I only have to hit them every few days"

discipline in any form isn't a one time thing, it requires consistency, if you are consistent with something it will work, the only thing people seem to want to put in the effort with a lot of the time is spanking.



Some kids don't care where the line is, or what happens when they cross it. Some won't respond to a line set in a certain manner.
yeah, sociopaths.






Did you not read his post?
I did, and expecting a 2 1/2 year old to consistently behave is ludicrous.

yeah, sociopaths.

Wow, Smunkee just called my sister a sociopath. Didn't see that coming.

No. She needs to be spanked because time-outs and talking to's just DO NOT WORK with her. Maybe as she grows older, and we're able to have more in-depth discussions, but for now?

For now she needs to be spanked because the line I drew for her means little in her mind until we reach the line of no-return, and daddy gives her a firm whack on her ass. That is a tangible, memorable experience. If anything, two hours in the corner will only give her the opportunity to plot her next caper.

She's fierce, independant, smarter than a good many adults (Including a number of posters in this thread from what I've seen...), and the thing I'm most proud of in the world. Does this mean I intend to let run run hog-ass wild? No. If anything it means I need to watch her more closely, since I see myself in her and I know how much nonsense I pulled as a kid.

If your kids are weak-willed enough that a talking to and a stint in the corner works, good for you. I'm dealing with a different sort of beast.

Now, just to be clear, it is kind of seeming like I'm taking the 'beat your fucking punk-ass kids' side of this argument. I'm not. It's better to -not- hit your kids, no doubt about it. But there is a fine line here, between being a gentle parent and being lax. I definately believe that one good spanking is worth a hundred time-outs, if it's done at the proper time and with attending teaching.

it's true that I don't know your kid, just as you don't know mine. They are anything but weak willed.

If your child is as intelligent as you say, the spankings are probably not beneficial to her, smart kids suffer more from spankings than dumb ones imo, because they think about it more.

Wow, Smunkee just called my sister a sociopath. Didn't see that coming.

there must be a line with her, something important enough for her to reign in her behavior, if there is not then you have a whole other problem.

it's true that I don't know your kid, just as you don't know mine. They are anything but weak willed.

If your child is as intelligent as you say, the spankings are probably not beneficial to her, smart kids suffer more from spankings than dumb ones imo, because they think about it more.

I'm sure she does think about it more, which is the point.

As she thinks about the result of her actions, she'll reflect on what was done and the fact that it was wrong. Seems right-on to me.

it's true that I don't know your kid, just as you don't know mine. They are anything but weak willed.

If your child is as intelligent as you say, the spankings are probably not beneficial to her, smart kids suffer more from spankings than dumb ones imo, because they think about it more.

*raises hand* After all this time it's 'bout time I took claim to my title of 'smart kid'.

Think about it...That's the point, no? You'd rather the kids not think?

That bill is stupid, i understand saying no EXCESSIVE spanking (like leaving horrible bruising etc) but no spanking altogether?? A child under 3 probably wont understand you trying to explain why something is wrong, like "Dont run out on to that road, you will get hurt". What they do understand is a small amount of pain.

Sure, why not? It works on cocker spaniels. :rolleyes:

Seriously, where does the line get drawn?

At a complete ban. Using violence against a child is just unacceptable, and it is mind-boggling that there are still first world countries out there who allow such abuse.

Sure, why not? It works on cocker spaniels. :rolleyes:

I rather like spaniels. You got something against them?

yeah i did. several times. he needs to learn some better techniques to deal with a 2.5 year old than 5-second violent outbursts.

You mean like all the other methods of discipline that were listed in that very same post?


maybe he had other issues that needed to be addressed?

Undoubtedly, but we never found them. Three therapists never found them. The youth detention center (ie. juvie) didn't find them. They're still missing.

I am pretty anti-physical violence in the home, so I may be biased, you know due to the past violent circumstances I have been in.

Our past circumstances will always bias us, but sometimes we have to try and look past them.

I hear that a lot (bold added by me) it usually goes like this

"my kids don't get time out, we tried it once for a few days and they were still the same badness, I hit them once though and they changed, now I only have to hit them every few days"

discipline in any form isn't a one time thing, it requires consistency, if you are consistent with something it will work, the only thing people seem to want to put in the effort with a lot of the time is spanking.

Indeed. Still doesn't explain the kids who simply don't respond to other forms of discipline, however.

yeah, sociopaths.

So any kid who doesn't respond to a given form of discipline is a sociopath?

I did, and expecting a 2 1/2 year old to consistently behave is ludicrous.

I didn't see anything about expecting a 2 1/2 year old to consistently behave.


Wow, Smunkee just called my sister a sociopath. Didn't see that coming.

Yeah, my brother too. He may have problems, but I don't think "sociopath" is among them.

I have never seen a kid that wouldn't respond to consistent, intelligent boundaries set by a patient and loving parent. I have seen kids who have been let to push the envelope so much that all a parent is left with is "smack the crap out of them" and even more than that I have seen parents who jump to that first, most of the time they say "my parents spanked me and I turned out okay" which apparently what they mean by "okay" is "I can't figure out how to teach my kids, so I am just going to hit them"

Kids are different for sure, but the saying goes "you teach people how to treat you" and if your kid knows that "the line" is getting spanked, they are going to do whatever it takes to get just shy of it, and when you spank them they think "okay, so that's the line". There is nothing special or magic about hitting a kid, all the kids need to know where the line is, if you can demonstrate that without physical violence aren't you doing a little better than those who can't?but smunkee, we all don't have such smart, intelligent kids like yours and we definately don't have your superb child handling skills in dealing with children.

(this is not sarcasm, but a compliment. ;) )

I'm sure she does think about it more, which is the point.

As she thinks about the result of her actions, she'll reflect on what was done and the fact that it was wrong. Seems right-on to me.

that depends on what she thinks about it. a dumb kid might think "oh, that hurt, I won't do that again"

whereas a smart kid might think "wow, my dad claims to love me, and yet he hit me, he told me not to hit the other kids because it's not nice, but he hit me, am I worthless?"

before you say "oh, kids don't think that" I did when I was a kid.



*raises hand* After all this time it's 'bout time I took claim to my title of 'smart kid'.

Think about it...That's the point, no? You'd rather the kids not think?

I want my kids to think about their actions and the consequences, I don't want them to have to ponder why I might be hitting them.

but smunkee, we all don't have such smart, intelligent kids like yours and we definately don't have your superb child handling skills in dealing with children.

(this is not sarcasm, but a compliment. ;) )

thanks.

By spanking I hope we're not including tossing babies done several flights of stairs. Cause that just teaches good life lesson to the young ones.

before you say "oh, kids don't think that" I did when I was a kid.

From what you've said before, I get the impression that you didn't get spankings - you got beatings. That's a whole 'nother can of worms.

So any kid who doesn't respond to a given form of discipline is a sociopath?

Yeah, my brother too. He may have problems, but I don't think "sociopath" is among them.

not learning from experience
no sense of responsibility
inability to form meaningful relationships
inability to control impulses
lack of moral sense
chronically antisocial behavior
no change in behavior after punishment
emotional immaturity
lack of guilt
self-centeredness

people who say "they didn't respond to any form of discipline, it's like they don't care" always seem to be describing sociopaths to me, although I am probably biased there too right?

before you say "oh, kids don't think that" I did when I was a kid.

I sure as hell didn't. Is that what you've been basing this arguement on?

I sure as hell didn't. Is that what you've been basing this arguement on?

not entirely.

why is it okay to hit your kids and not okay to hit adults?

From what you've said before, I get the impression that you didn't get spankings - you got beatings. That's a whole 'nother can of worms.

one leads from the other.

I am not anti-physical violence because I think it sucked to be hit in the face with a baseball bat (and that did suck) but because I think it's a shitty way to deal with your problems.

not entirely.

why is it okay to hit your kids and not okay to hit adults?

Literally? Cause adults can get a lawyer to sue. I think you're equating two rather different things by using the word 'hit' for both.

why is it okay to hit your kids and not okay to hit adults?

Good question, and one these people can never answer without exposing that all their "love" of children is nothing more than a sham, and that their true feelings are that children aren't proper humans, that they are worth less.

From what you've said before, I get the impression that you didn't get spankings - you got beatings. That's a whole 'nother can of worms.

where is the line, exactly, between the two?

Good question, and one these people can never answer without exposing that all their "love" of children is nothing more than a sham, and that their true feelings are that children aren't proper humans, that they are worth less.

Also, children make much better eating once they're tenderized.

not entirely.

why is it okay to hit your kids and not okay to hit adults?

Because Might makes right.


...wait... shit! :(

trick question!


;)

Literally? Cause adults can get a lawyer to sue. I think you're equating two rather different things by using the word 'hit' for both.

no matter what word you use it's the same thing, if I did that to an adult I would be wrong.

are you saying though that it would be okay for my husband to hit me? I mean assuming that I didn't have the resources to get a lawyer and sue?

where is the line, exactly, between the two?

Apparently in the eyes of the abuser.

Also, children make much better eating once they're tenderized.

Spoken like a true carnivore.

Of course there should be laws against spanking children. Not just because I think it's wrong and stupid to spank children but it will be easier to prosecute parents who mistreat their children if there are strict laws against child abuse. And these laws should apply for children older than three too...

I think you're equating two rather different things by using the word 'hit' for both.And by that you presumably mean you lack the physical strength to subdue & abuse other adults in whatever way you see fit - right?

Why can't you hit adults? Not only can you hit them, you can shoot them If they break into your house in the middle of the night... Circumstances, it's all about the circumstances.

the thing about self defense is the defense part.

I tend not to be the legal gaurdian of other adults, but that may be beside the point.

and to what degree of gaurding someone is involved with hitting them?

not entirely.

why is it okay to hit your kids and not okay to hit adults?

Why can't you hit adults? Not only can you hit them, you can shoot them If they break into your house in the middle of the night... Circumstances, it's all about the circumstances.

Spoken like a true carnivore.
What else could these eyeteeth be for?

What else could these eyeteeth be for?

What is your brain for?

And by that you presumably mean you lack the physical strength to subdue & abuse other adults in whatever way you see fit - right?

I tend not to be the legal gaurdian of other adults, but that may be beside the point.

Depends. Sometimes, it helps me walk and chew gum at the same time, but then I got braces, so now I only use it for walking.

Well, some of us use it to take a stance against cruelty, be that against children or animals, because we see that those most in need of protection should not be the ones afforded the least of it. Then again, some of us are just better people that way.

What is your brain for?

Depends. Sometimes, it helps me walk and chew gum at the same time, but then I got braces, so now I only use it for walking.

Yeah, that sounds a lot more complicated than walking.

But hey, if you need some walking done, I'm totally your guy. Watch. *walks in circles*

You don't need to toil at earning my pity. I always deny it to such ilk. Scorn, on the other hand, I've plenty of.

Well, some of us use it to take a stance against cruelty, be that against children or animals, because we see that those most in need of protection should not be the ones afforded the least of it.

Yeah, that sounds a lot more complicated than walking.

But hey, if you need some walking done, I'm totally your guy. Watch. *walks in circles*

Yay scorn! Then we can put it in a pot, heat it up, and make popscorn! *ba-dum tisch* Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

Regrettably.

I tend not to be the legal gaurdian of other adults, but that may be beside the point.Right, so do you think institutionalized adults, like people with severe handicaps, should be subdued & beaten by their guardians?

I find it slightly amusing you bring up guardianship. The whole point of guardians, is that wards aren't capable of being autonomous individuals. Yet you somehow think physically abusing human beings who aren't fit to take care of themselves, is justifiable?

That's.. Well let's just say I'm wondering if maybe you need a guardian.

Given the choice between being hollered at and heavily insulted, with swearing and name calling and a good spanking as a child, I'd actually pick the spanking because my parents never tried to reason with me when I fucked up. It was they'd yell at me, I'd sit there, take it and plot my revenge. And boy did I have a fun time with revenge.

On the other hand when I didn't get yelled at and got spanked, the few times I did, I didn't plot my revenge because I didn't feel insulted.

No, I wasn't one of those 'dumb kids'; I just hate being yelled at because it always involved one of my parents saying very hurtful things to me. My father would apologise later and kiss my ass, my mother would ignore me.

The spankings hurt way less than the 'talkings' ever did.

You don't need to toil at earning my pity. I always deny it to such ilk. Scorn, on the other hand, I've plenty of.

Yay scorn! Then we can put it in a pot, heat it up, and make popscorn! *ba-dum tisch* Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week.

http://necroticobsession.com/bb/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gifIt's amazing the anger produced in someone just because his uncle made him touch his "captain winkey" when he was a kid.

What's the matter? Life got you down? Everyone else is out there getting laid and having fun while you're stuck in the basement with your kiddy porn?

It's okay, guy. There are counselors that can help you come to grips with all those memories of laying awake at night, knowing that at anytime your drunk uncle was going to come in to your room and put his "captain winkey" in your "little firehouse." Do you still remember the smell of Whiskey on his breath? Was it JD or did he drink that cheap garage made stuff?

Are you still hurt by the fact that all your first sexual experience had to say to you was, "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" Or was it, "Mooooooo."

Put the peanut butter down and put the dog back in the backyard. Get your fat ass on a treadmill, lose some weight and maybe a little anger over your unfortunate introduction to incest and maybe you can find a sexual partner that can talk and doesn't walk on all fours. ;)

BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!

You win NSG.

I personally think this would be a useless law. I mean, how can you enforce this law. You cant exactly send the police into every person's house asking if they have spanked their children. It would be downright impossible to enforce without breaking people's rights of privacy.

Given the choice between being hollered at and heavily insulted, with swearing and name calling and a good spanking as a child, I'd actually pick the spanking because my parents never tried to reason with me when I fucked up. It was they'd yell at me, I'd sit there, take it and plot my revenge. And boy did I have a fun time with revenge.

On the other hand when I didn't get yelled at and got spanked, the few times I did, I didn't plot my revenge because I didn't feel insulted.

No, I wasn't one of those 'dumb kids'; I just hate being yelled at because it always involved one of my parents saying very hurtful things to me. My father would apologise later and kiss my ass, my mother would ignore me.

The spankings hurt way less than the 'talkings' ever did.

just to be clear, there really is no excuse for verbal, emotional, or mental abuse either.

just to be clear, there really is no excuse for verbal, emotional, or mental abuse either.

Too bad politicians forget about that kind of abuse when they are rallying behind bills to curb child abuse.

Of course, it's harder to prove the verbal type and its sub-genres because it's the child's word versus that of the parent and the child may be dismissed because they could be seen as embellishing the story, whereas with physical abuse there is no wiggling room for the parent.

Regrettably.

Indeed, truely we shall be lost without my presence the next week.

We've stepped up from hit to physically abused? I should write that down somewhere...

if my husband hit me wouldn't you say I was abused?

Probably.

so, why is it different for kids?

Right, so do you think institutionalized adults, like people with severe handicaps, should be subdued & beaten by their guardians?

I find it slightly amusing you bring up guardianship. The whole point of guardians, is that wards aren't capable of being autonomous individuals. Yet you somehow think physically abusing human beings who aren't fit to take care of themselves, is justifiable?

That's.. Well let's just say I'm wondering if maybe you need a guardian.

We've stepped up from hit to physically abusing? I should write that down somewhere...

After reading this thread, I now know why there should be a third thing to never discuss in polite public company. The first two, as I've come to learn them, are religion and politics. The third is parenting.

Guess what? People WITH children are a hell of a lot more likely to be hair-triggered on hot-button parenting issues than those WITHOUT them or those who never had them. Some parents get flat-out defensive and surly.

It seems to me that parenting debates, like those on abortion, have a defined acceptible membership. In the case of abortion, it's usually "no uterus, no opinion". In the case of parenting, it seems to be "no children, no opinion."

Thing is, those of us without children are still affected by their behavior -- fly on any airliner with an unruly child if you doubt this. I've been a public school teacher at the high school level, and I can see the indelible marks (sometimes literally) left on children as a result of parenting -- both good and bad.

All that said, the bill in question in California is unenforceable and unnecessary. CPS can be, and usually is, activated by those who notice the signs of abuse.

I'll add that despite what some here have posted, the notion that "I was spanked and I turned out well" is NOT rubbish. I lived in fear of doing anything that might deserve my mother's dreaded wooden spoon. It hurt, and it made me consider the consequences of my actions before taking them. It hasn't made me a violent adult, and I do not fear that it will make me a violent parent.

There's a scale for just about everything. We can have Murder 1 and Murder 3 -- and there's a difference between corrective punishment and abuse. There's also isolation, denial of privileges, withholding of rewards an many more options. It is a continuum, and within it, parents exust on a continuum as well. Those who resort almost instantly to spankings seem to me to be hurried, overburdened, outnumbered (why any couple has more than two young children at a time bogles my mind) or lazy. Proper conditioning takes time, and if spanking is all you have time for, that's what you'll use, because for better or worse, it has its worth and range of effect.

And that's the catch -- punishments must vary to be effective. As I got older, I lived less in fear of any spankings than I did of "holy shit, Mom called Dad AT WORK with what I did!" It depended on the severity of the offense, the nature of the offense, who was affected by my behavior and Dad's overall mood. When I broke the garage door opener by opening and closing it over and over 'cause it made a cool noise (and let's face it, when you're a kid, remote controls are COOL), I had to stay home that weekend and "chore off" the cost of the new motor instead of accompanying Dad on a fishing trip. At 10, when I spent the money I'd collected by selling candy for the Boy Scouts, I was pulled from scouts and had a short session with Dad's infamous belt. At no time after that did I abuse machinery or mishandle others' money (good thing, too, because one of my first jobs as a young adult was an agent for the Department of Licensing, with hundreds of thousands of dollars of State money in my charge).

So the bill is unrealistic, if well-intended. Better than that would be to save that effort and put it into what is almost always an underfunded and undermanned CPS/foster care system.

I personally think this would be a useless law. I mean, how can you enforce this law. You cant exactly send the police into every person's house asking if they have spanked their children. It would be downright impossible to enforce without breaking people's rights of privacy.Shit like this gets done for two reasons. First & foremost, it aids prople in a position to pick up on abuse (daycare workers, teachers etc.) and affords children some small degree of legal protection.
Secondly, laws play a huge role in molding social standards. In this case, it helps make it socially unacceptable to abuse children, which in turn means it'll happen a lot less.

if my husband hit me wouldn't you say I was abused?


Just curious, Smunkee. If your husband swatted you on the fanny, would you report him for abuse?

if my husband hit me wouldn't you say I was abused?

Probably.

Well, I dare say I'd find someone having, how would you say, sexual relations with a husband, and said relations with a kid very different. For example.


As long as were going to be doing this whole comparison thing, I may as well join in.

that's not a fair comparison, the difference in that is that the child doesn't consent to sex

so, why is it different for kids?

Well, I dare say I'd find someone having, how would you say, sexual relations with a husband, and said relations with a kid very different. For example.


As long as were going to be doing this whole comparison thing, I may as well join in.

Why doesn't the child consent?

they can't.

We've stepped up from hit to physically abusing? I should write that down somewhere...How is it not abuse when you have someone at your mercy, and use the opportunity to inflict pain on them?

At best it's a fucking copout. At worst it's too depraved for words.

Why not?

I am not going to get into a side discussion with you just because you feel the need to change the subject.

that's not a fair comparison, the difference in that is that the child doesn't consent to sex


Why doesn't the child consent?

they can't.

Why not?

Why not?Because they're incapable of comprehending the scope & consequences of their decisions. That's the reason children have parents/guardians. It isn't so the guardians can have an interesting pet, or so they can twist & indoctrinate the runt in whatever way they see fit. Guardians are there to do what's in the best interest of the ward, not the guardian.

You mean like all the other methods of discipline that were listed in that very same post?


there are several possibilities here

one is that he isnt doing the methods he listed correctly. many many people dont.

two is that he is expecting a level of behavior that a 2.5 year old just isnt capable of.

three is that he needs to branch out a bit more in techniques.

no 2.5 year old behaves well all the time. its just not in the beast. so in a few months his child will again be the angel she used to be and he'll say "well i guess that spanking thing really worked" when all that happened is that she got to a more well behaved phase of life.

How is it not abuse when you have someone at your mercy, and use the opportunity to inflict pain on them?

At best it's a fucking copout. At worst it's too depraved for words.

I thusly declare I've been verbally abused by Fass.

I am not going to get into a side discussion with you just because you feel the need to change the subject.

Bear with me. Why is it that they can't consent?

How is it not abuse when you have someone at your mercy, and use the opportunity to inflict pain on them?

At best it's a fucking copout. At worst it's too depraved for words.

no, at best it's kinky fun. Although that goes back to the whole consent thing.

I'm actually finding it makes the whole ordeal more entertaining, for me.

It really does prove that logic has no place here. :D

This time-warp is making my eyes bleed with all these quotes flying about in random directions...

Given the choice between being hollered at and heavily insulted, with swearing and name calling and a good spanking as a child, I'd actually pick the spanking because my parents never tried to reason with me when I fucked up. It was they'd yell at me, I'd sit there, take it and plot my revenge. And boy did I have a fun time with revenge.

On the other hand when I didn't get yelled at and got spanked, the few times I did, I didn't plot my revenge because I didn't feel insulted.

No, I wasn't one of those 'dumb kids'; I just hate being yelled at because it always involved one of my parents saying very hurtful things to me. My father would apologise later and kiss my ass, my mother would ignore me.

The spankings hurt way less than the 'talkings' ever did.

luckily good parenting isnt a choice between physical or mental abuse.

I just feel like posting observations.

I'm sure some of the people here who are ok with spanking would cry if someone beat a dog.

Some people say it will be too tough to enforce. Back in the day, people felt the "need" to beat their wives to get some respect from them. Look what happened after measures were taken against THAT.

Pancakes are tasty. That is all.

Because they're incapable of comprehending the scope & consequences of their decisions. That's the reason children have parents/guardians. It isn't so the guardians can have an interesting pet, or so they can twist & indoctrinate the runt in whatever way they see fit. Guardians are there to do what's in the best interest of the ward, not the guardian.

*sigh* Fine, but it's much less fun to go through this with you than it is with smunkee.

So, what, precisely, is in the ward's best intrest, and how did you come to this conclusion?

This time-warp is making my eyes bleed with all these quotes flying about in random directions...

I'm actually finding it makes the whole ordeal more entertaining, for me.

[QUOTE=Terecia;12240309]I just feel like posting observations.

I'm sure some of the people here who are ok with spanking would cry if someone beat a dog.
QUOTE]

Yes, I would be upset if I saw someone beating a dog. I would report him to the authorities.

I would not report someone for tapping their dog on the nose for chewing slippers.

I'm sure some of the people here who are ok with spanking would cry if someone beat a dog.

This dog once bit my older sister in the stomach. Some serious injuries for her. The dog was of course, put down. At the time, I figured that was a bit unfair, but thinking back, there's I can't figure a reasonably way for it to stay alive and, you know, actually live its life.

As long as we're just posting random thoughts, it's something your idea reminded me of.

one leads from the other.

Not necessarily, no. I've known plenty of parents who used a spanking as discipline every once and a while. Very few were bad parents. The one woman I met who beat her kids lost custody of them - and a good thing, too.

From what you've said before, I get the impression that you didn't get spankings - you got beatings. That's a whole 'nother can of worms.
where is the line, exactly, between the two?

If you use an implement, you've probably crossed the line into beatings. If you hit more than once or twice, you've probably crossed the line into beatings. If you leave physical signs, unless you have a child that bruises very easily, you've crossed the line.

A spanking is not supposed to cause actual physical harm.

I agree, but you'd be willing to legislate it? It is my belief that legislating personal taste is wrong. There are already laws against abuse as there should be. Why outlaw a minor butt-whooping?
Because it's easier to enforce it than it is to enforce the laws against child abuse, simply because it's easier to prove. One hit is enough, while something more is needed before it'll be called "abuse".

Also, see what Similization said, which I agree with:
Shit like this gets done for two reasons. First & foremost, it aids prople in a position to pick up on abuse (daycare workers, teachers etc.) and affords children some small degree of legal protection.
Secondly, laws play a huge role in molding social standards. In this case, it helps make it socially unacceptable to abuse children, which in turn means it'll happen a lot less.
spanking is the worst way to teach your child discipline but should it be illegal? no. the enforcement of a law like that would be a nightmare and would do nothing to make childrearing better.
I don't think it would be a nightmare to enforce it, personally. But regardless, the signals that would be sent by outlawing it and the fact that it is punishable by prison time means that it would have a stronger preventive effect than any study that finds that hitting the child is bad for him / her.

I personally think this would be a useless law. I mean, how can you enforce this law. You cant exactly send the police into every person's house asking if they have spanked their children. It would be downright impossible to enforce without breaking people's rights of privacy.

It would stop people from spanking their kids in public, and probably base investigations on people reporting in, hospitals, and random observations. It's not like they're gonna make a "Child protection squad" going door to door.

Apart from that, it's the signal effect that's important.

if my husband hit me wouldn't you say I was abused?

Depends on the situation, really. If you were hysterical and out of control and about to harm yourself and your children, a good smack might help. It might be the only way to get your attention and bring you back to reality.

Now, I'm not suggesting that this is the case with children all the time, but it does demonstrate that hitting can be the proper action to take. With children, especially young children whose moral development isn't yet at the point of, "Do this because it's the right thing to do," there has to be some sort of discipline system in place for them. Different things seem to work for different children.

With adults, we expect a bit more. We shouldn't have to set up a system for them to do what they are supposed to. Of course, there are those adults who don't act like adults either, and we punish them by locking them up in prison. Seems a bit worse than a swift smack on the rear end to me.

I would never spank any kid in my charge, and, subjectively, I do not think that it is a good way of punishing kids at all. That being said, I don't know if I support legislation banning spanking because of how impractical it would be. Parenting in general is a very delicate issue for the government.

How is it not abuse when you have someone at your mercy, and use the opportunity to inflict pain on them?

At best it's a fucking copout. At worst it's too depraved for words.

LOL. I can attest to the fact that I felt more pain from my mother giving me her "look" and saying, "I'm very disappointed in you," than I ever did from a spanking. Should she not have said it?

Parents are tasked with bringing their children up - teaching them right and wrong - and disciplining them. It isn't meant to be happy-go-lucky-butterflies-and-roses. You're going to have to inflict some sort of pain, be it emotional or physical, to get the point across that what was done is wrong - that it caused harm - and that the child should not do it.


there are several possibilities here

one is that he isnt doing the methods he listed correctly. many many people dont.

two is that he is expecting a level of behavior that a 2.5 year old just isnt capable of.

three is that he needs to branch out a bit more in techniques.

no 2.5 year old behaves well all the time. its just not in the beast. so in a few months his child will again be the angel she used to be and he'll say "well i guess that spanking thing really worked" when all that happened is that she got to a more well behaved phase of life.

So, we're not even going to consider the idea that he might be doing what is best for his particular child, eh?


I'm sure some of the people here who are ok with spanking would cry if someone beat a dog.

Beat a dog? Yes, absolutely. Swat a dog on the nose or rear end when he does something wrong? Absolutely not. In fact, that is precisely what should be done, if one wants to teach the dog.


I don't think it would be a nightmare to enforce it, personally. But regardless, the signals that would be sent by outlawing it and the fact that it is punishable by prison time means that it would have a stronger preventive effect than any study that finds that hitting the child is bad for him / her.

Yeah, and we'd also have lots of children without parents being put into foster homes because a parent swatted them on the butt. Or, maybe even because a child claimed a parent swatted them on the butt.

I don't think it would be a nightmare to enforce it, personally. But regardless, the signals that would be sent by outlawing it and the fact that it is punishable by prison time means that it would have a stronger preventive effect than any study that finds that hitting the child is bad for him / her.


i was thinking about in-home spankings and swats on a diapered behind that cant possible to more than jolt the child.

its already illegal to beat your child. i dont see that its helpful to prosecute parents who use spanking lightly and sparingly.

i do agree that it would be nice to have a consensus that spanking is a bad thing and have some public pressure against its use. i guess it could happen, i never thought that smoking would be legistlated out of use and we are on the verge of that eh?

So, we're not even going to consider the idea that he might be doing what is best for his particular child, eh?


no we're not. spanking is never the best punishment.

never.

im not saying that he is a horrible father who is scarring his child for life. i expect that he is a pretty good father who is occasionally using bad parenting techniques.

Oh, spanking babies. I was worried for a second there.

Um...this is awkward.

At a complete ban. Using violence against a child is just unacceptable, and it is mind-boggling that there are still first world countries out there who allow such abuse.

I can't praise you enough for saying this. Finally, somebody who will fucking side with me on this issue.

Being spanked, slapped, and hit as a child, I can safely say that it didn't help in the least... Especially that time I got drop kicked into my room after playing in a puddle of water.

*sigh* Fine, but it's much less fun to go through this with you than it is with smunkee. Fortunately for you, you're too damn smug for me, so you'll have to wait for Smunk.

I don't know if I support legislation banning spanking because of how impractical it would be.That depends entirely on how you intend to enforce it. Various countries do have comparable legislation. Some have more far reaching versions. But perhaps it's easiest to grasp if you compare it to limitations on free speech. The German state, for example, won't stop you from denying the Holocaust or expressing neo-Nazi sympathies in private. If you cause a fuss about it in public, however, they'll come after you. The state isn't actively rooting out neo-Nazis. The principle is similar here.Parenting in general is a very delicate issue for the government.No argument there. Still, when it comes to violating the defenceless, the community/state is the only thing in a position to intervene, and since we unfortunately aren't all great anarchists 24/7, the possibility for such intervention is needed.Finally, somebody who will fucking side with me on this issue.He's not the only one ;)

no we're not. spanking is never the best punishment.

Says you, the person who isn't this child's parent.

And I got a backhand to the face when I was four years old for spilling water on the carpet by accident. I would like to ask: was that necessary?

No. But, depending on your parents' past experiences with you, if you had deliberately poured paint all over the carpet and were beginning to transfer it to the walls, despite being told not to, I could see how a parent might need to go to that. At the very least, they might very well have to physically restrain you, which could hurt worse than a quick smack.

I also have to ask this to people who defend spanking: are your tactics necessary? Why don't you reflect upon your methods and see what's really wrong, rather than going off and smacking your kid for (the apparent) lack of a better alternative.

Why ask a question if you aren't open to the answer going either way? You've obviously already decided that you are absolutely right on this issue. Why even pretend that you are here for a discussion instead of here to demonize anyone who might disagree with you?

That bill is stupid, i understand saying no EXCESSIVE spanking (like leaving horrible bruising etc) but no spanking altogether?? A child under 3 probably wont understand you trying to explain why something is wrong, like "Dont run out on to that road, you will get hurt". What they do understand is a small amount of pain.

a child under 3 understand won't why you who they look to for protection is hurting them...the person guilty for a child running on the street is the parent not the child...any parent whose supervision is so lax that their small children have the opportunity to run on the street need to be spanked...

He's not the only one ;)

Oh, good. I just couldn't be bothered to read through all of the pages of this thread that have since popped up in my absence.


And I got a backhand to the face when I was four years old for spilling water on the carpet by accident. I would like to ask: was that necessary?

I also have to ask this to people who defend spanking: are your tactics necessary? Why don't you reflect upon your methods and see what's really wrong, rather than going off and smacking your kid for (the apparent) lack of a better alternative.

Fortunately for you, you're too damn smug for me, so you'll have to wait for Smunk.

Yay smugness! *sticks toungue out at Simi*

I also have to ask this to people who defend spanking: are your tactics necessary? Why don't you reflect upon your methods and see what's really wrong, rather than going off and smacking your kid for (the apparent) lack of a better alternative.

Oh, yeah, I totally want kids dropkicked into rooms. Because, you know, that's what this topic has been about. and what I've been advocating. Yep, nothing like the smell of already illegal child abuse.

You might have been fucked up by your parents, but that sure as hell wasn't a spanking.

P.S. It's comparison time:
"I was violently raped, so we should ban all forms of pornagraphy."

i was thinking about in-home spankings and swats on a diapered behind that cant possible to more than jolt the child.
And those probably won't be reported either. Granted I know nothing about the spesific reasoning behind this particular law, but as I see it it's not really those kinds of spankings that are being targeted.

its already illegal to beat your child.
Is it? Or is it 'only' illegal to abuse? (I know not ;) )

If it's already illegal than there isn't any need to make a fuss is there, since new law covers what the old law legislates as well?

i dont see that its helpful to prosecute parents who use spanking lightly and sparingly.
It won't be. The law itself will be though - that's the signal effect again, making the parent think twice because he/she knows it's illegal and punishable.

It will make it easier to convict someone who hits the child but abuse cannot be proven though. In that respect it might be helpful.

i do agree that it would be nice to have a consensus that spanking is a bad thing and have some public pressure against its use. i guess it could happen, i never thought that smoking would be legistlated out of use and we are on the verge of that eh?
Oh, look forward to that day! It's a fantastic idea. I love living in a smoke free public environment, and even the smokers are happy. Well, they're not all happy, but a vast majority are content and accepting. :p

I'm in total agreement: Spanking a child isn't the best way to discipline them. No argument from me.

However, even as smart as my daughter is *more gloating*, she hasn't developed enough for me to explain exactly why complicated issues deserve punishment. Aside from 'Hot!' and 'Ouch!' she's still limited by a lack of communication skills. A spanking, and I'm applying the term loosely, gets my point across in terms she understands. That = Bad. Bad = Spanking. Spanking = Not doing *that* anymore.

As she grows and her mind develops, I'm sure I'll rely less and less on force and the threat of force, since I will be able to delve into the details of things.

A half-hearted swat on her diapered ass isn't going to hurt her in any lasting way, and it's not abuse. No. That's discipline. Is it as polished and above the curve as some of you apparantly are with your parenting techniques? Apparantly not, but it works well when coupled with talking and I have no fear for her future mental health.

On that note, I'll say with all confidence that if you couldn't handle a -spanking- as a kid for doing something wrong, then you were doomed to failure to begin with. That's not to say that those of you who were abused have anything to regret or be ashamed of. Far from it. There is a world of difference between abuse and discipline. If you can't see that difference, you shouldn't be a parent to begin with.

Personally, the line isn't fine at all, and I am more than comfortable with spanking my daughter, because it hurts my soul to do it and I know that getting 'carried away' is a fucking lie that isn't in the cards for me or mine.

Reason #58452845 why People Make Me Sick.

Talk about an unwelcome intrusion into child care on the part of government. :rolleyes:

spanking is wrong and never acceptable, it's abuse...parents who resort to spanking are poor parents, people have no ideas other than to lash out at a small child for often trivial offenses...

Says you, the person who isn't this child's parent.

i dont have to be her parent to know bad parenting when i read it.

no child is best served by spanking.

i dont have to be her parent to know bad parenting when i read it.

no child is best served by spanking.

You know all the children who ever have or ever will be born? You have personally parented all of them and therefore know what they will and will not respond to?

Children are individuals, not little automatons. Different children respond differently to various types of discipline. Generally, they respond differently as they age and form a clearer concept of right and wrong and understand more about the world around them.

And some, like my brother, have discipline problems from the start until the end. They don't respond to much of anything, although he did respond better to spanking when young than he did when he got older.

i dont have to be her parent to know bad parenting when i read it.

no child is best served by spanking.

Funny...I keep hearing you say it and...I dunno, it just won't stop being as vapid as it was the first time I heard you say it.

Funny...I keep hearing you say it and...I dunno, it just won't stop being as vapid as it was the first time I heard you say it.

vapid but true.

spanking is wrong and never acceptable, it's abuse...parents who resort to spanking are poor parents, people have no ideas other than to lash out at a small child for often trivial offenses...

Do all parents who use spanking "lash out at a small child for often trivial offenses"?

Considering that I was spanked once in my entire life, do you think I was a perfect little angel child and only ever committed a single "trivial offense" and then never did anything else wrong?

You know all the children who ever have or ever will be born? You have personally parented all of them and therefore know what they will and will not respond to?

Children are individuals, not little automatons. Different children respond differently to various types of discipline. Generally, they respond differently as they age and form a clearer concept of right and wrong and understand more about the world around them.

And some, like my brother, have discipline problems from the start until the end. They don't respond to much of anything, although he did respond better to spanking when young than he did when he got older.

and you have no idea how he would have responded to better parenting.

and you have no idea how he would have responded to better parenting.

I'm not sure what else could have been tried. My father certainly wasn't the best parent, but my mother was about as good as they get. And he and I, at least at first, received the same parenting. It worked with me, but not with him. Because the same methods didn't work with my brother, they tried others. My mother was at her wits' end by the time he left home.

Wait! Wasn't that my whole point? That children respond differently to parenting techniques?

You can attempt to insult my mother all you want, but she was (and is) pretty much the best parent out there.

Do all parents who use spanking "lash out at a small child for often trivial offenses"?

Considering that I was spanked once in my entire life, do you think I was a perfect little angel child and only ever committed a single "trivial offense" and then never did anything else wrong?

no, but your parents did very well, they obviously realized that hitting a child is pointless there are always better ways...my kids do many things wrong but nothing to deserve being struck...

I'm not sure what else could have been tried. My father certainly wasn't the best parent, but my mother was about as good as they get. And he and I, at least at first, received the same parenting. It worked with me, but not with him. Because the same methods didn't work with my brother, they tried others. My mother was at her wits' end by the time he left home.

Wait! Wasn't that my whole point? That children respond differently to parenting techniques?

You can attempt to insult my mother all you want, but she was (and is) pretty much the best parent out there.

some of my kids have me pulling my hair out in frustration but it's my inability to find a better way of getting through to them rather than them being bad kids...parenting is a learned experience and we can't know everything but taking a short cut and beating our kids to bend them to our will, will only worsen the situation...

no, but your parents did very well, they obviously realized that hitting a child is pointless there are always better ways...my kids do many things wrong but nothing to deserve being struck...

No, they didn't realize that hitting is pointless - they found use for it. It was simply very occasional use.

some of my kids have me pulling my hair out in frustration but it's my inability to find a better way of getting through to them rather than them being bad kids...parenting is a learned experience and we can't know everything but taking a short cut and beating our kids to bend them to our will, will only worsen the situation...

Spanking != beating

Nor is spanking necessarily a "short cut".

Spanking != beating

Nor is spanking necessarily a "short cut".
and Spaking |= hitting.

a slap on the face is not spanking.
A punch in the stomach is definately not spanking
a series of hard hits to the rump is not spanking.
backhanding someone is not spanking.

to me, Spanking is a sharp smack with the open palm on the rear of the child. not a hard smack, but a sharp one. and only to the rear, not the face, arm, hand, stomach or even legs/feet.

and Spaking |= hitting.

a slap on the face is not spanking.
A punch in the stomach is definately not spanking
a series of hard hits to the rump is not spanking.
backhanding someone is not spanking.

to me, Spanking is a sharp smack with the open palm on the rear of the child. not a hard smack, but a sharp one. and only to the rear, not the face, arm, hand, stomach or even legs/feet.

if you were to spank an adult because they didn't do as you expected you would either 1-end up in jail with an assault charge against you or 2-flat on your back with a broken nose...if it isn't acceptable to strike an adult how is ok to strike a child?

spanking is abuse...

If you are spanking your child to the point where you are now worried that the authorities might take notice, you're probably better off cutting that out anyway.

If anyone ever suggests that, I think we should lock her in a room and force her to watch porn for the rest of her life. And not nice, missionary porn either. This stuff will involve badgers, emus, a human brain, and a pale-skinned woman with short purple hair. AT THE SAME TIME!

So in other words...Saturday night. Right?

While from my own experience it may have been effective, I don't really support it at all.

and a pale-skinned woman with short purple hair.

What does my girlfriend in college have to do with this?

if you were to spank an adult because they didn't do as you expected you would either 1-end up in jail with an assault charge against you or 2-flat on your back with a broken nose...if it isn't acceptable to strike an adult how is ok to strike a child?

spanking is abuse...

I'm not responsible for adults, aside from myself. Alas, I bave seen many rude and unruly adults that could have profited from having their asses thoroughly spanked.

I am, however, responsible for my children, their discipline, and their education.

And for the millionth time spanking =/= abuse. No. Maybe you can't wrap your head around it, but that is a personal problem, since it's not that big of a leap.

P.S. It's comparison time:
"I was violently raped, so we should ban all forms of pornagraphy."

If anyone ever suggests that, I think we should lock her in a room and force her to watch porn for the rest of her life. And not nice, missionary porn either. This stuff will involve badgers, emus, a human brain, and a pale-skinned woman with short purple hair. AT THE SAME TIME!

if you were to spank an adult because they didn't do as you expected you would either 1-end up in jail with an assault charge against you or 2-flat on your back with a broken nose...if it isn't acceptable to strike an adult how is ok to strike a child?

spanking is abuse...

if you "spank" an adult, assault won't be the charge, sexual harrasement is.

And if I was to spank an adult, then money changed hands and there would be consent. ;)

and would you have someone arrested for assault when they slap you on the back or give what they say is a 'friendly' punch in the arm?

or how about suing them for emotional trauma when they surprise/shock you?

do you call your lawyers when they insult you?

I bet you also want parents arrested for mental abuse when you see them playing Tag with their child/children or roughouse with them on the ground.

Carrying things to absuridty works both ways.

*snip*
How old was your daughter again?
Oh, yeah, I totally want kids dropkicked into rooms. Because, you know, that's what this topic has been about. and what I've been advocating. Yep, nothing like the smell of already illegal child abuse.

You might have been fucked up by your parents, but that sure as hell wasn't a spanking.

P.S. It's comparison time:
"I was violently raped, so we should ban all forms of pornagraphy."

Bad comparison. Maybe if you tried "I was violently raped, so we should ban all forms of violent rape pornography"?

How old was your daughter again?

She turned 2 this past September, so two and a quarter or so.

EDIT: Just because she's perty and I like to show her off:

http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/8383/babyblue22ik.jpg

Very old picture, but that's her.

Spanking != beating

Nor is spanking necessarily a "short cut".

after a certain age spanking IS beating

did your brother get an openhanded swat on his trousered behind from your mother to get him to behave when he was 10?

the older the child the more severe the spanking has to be in order to get any results. what works for the 2.5 year old who is wearing diapers certainly wont work for a 15 year old.

this is one reason why most parents stop spanking their children after age 7 or so.

I'm not responsible for adults, aside from myself. Alas, I bave seen many rude and unruly adults that could have profited from having their asses thoroughly spanked.

I am, however, responsible for my children, their discipline, and their education.

And for the millionth time spanking =/= abuse. No. Maybe you can't wrap your head around it, but that is a personal problem, since it's not that big of a leap.

apparently it's you who has personal problem and can't wrap her head around it, obviously it's to big of a leap for you... You have an inability to be a responsible parent...why try to find a way that does not involve pain to teach my child when I can just hurt them to get my way and pretend I'm a good parent, how nice...

She turned 2 this past September, so two and a quarter or so. one two year old and you're an expert parent:rolleyes:

if you "spank" an adult, assault won't be the charge, sexual harrasement is.

And if I was to spank an adult, then money changed hands and there would be consent. ;)

and would you have someone arrested for assault when they slap you on the back or give what they say is a 'friendly' punch in the arm?

or how about suing them for emotional trauma when they surprise/shock you?

do you call your lawyers when they insult you?

I bet you also want parents arrested for mental abuse when you see them playing Tag with their child/children or roughouse with them on the ground.

Carrying things to absuridty works both ways.

now you're being silly...if you were to use sufficient force to change an adults behaviour it wouldn't be acceptable, but you knew that right?..

No. But, depending on your parents' past experiences with you, if you had deliberately poured paint all over the carpet and were beginning to transfer it to the walls, despite being told not to, I could see how a parent might need to go to that. At the very least, they might very well have to physically restrain you, which could hurt worse than a quick smack.



Why ask a question if you aren't open to the answer going either way? You've obviously already decided that you are absolutely right on this issue. Why even pretend that you are here for a discussion instead of here to demonize anyone who might disagree with you?

1: Fuck that strawman tactic. I was sitting on the floor, watching TV and eating my hamburger, when I reached to grab some chips. I elbow nudged my glass, and it fell over. Before I could do anything about it, *SMACK*. I was on the floor at that point, when my dad proceeded to scream at me for spilling water on the carpet. Don't think you can use such shallow tactics with people who have memories as clear as mine.

2: See above for my reasoning in this thread. If people are willing to fucking defend a guy like my dad for what he did, even when I recite events exactly as they happened almost fifteen years ago, I'm not going to be opening my ears, period.

She turned 2 this past September, so two and a quarter or so.

EDIT: Just because she's perty and I like to show her off:

http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/8383/babyblue22ik.jpg

Very old picture, but that's her.

what a beautiful little girl!

she has eyes that should be in anime!

spanking is wrong and never acceptable, it's abuse...parents who resort to spanking are poor parents, people have no ideas other than to lash out at a small child for often trivial offenses...
Have you ever been a parent? If not, you have no right to judge parents.

Have you ever been a parent? If not, you have no right to judge parents.

Anyone who's ever been a child with a sound mind has every right to judge people's parental skills.

Let's get to the point: I'm against spanking because it opens the door to very hard hitting, even if the default spanking method is used. It happened to me, and fuck knows it happens to a lot of kids.

Your skin turns red from a spank anyway, so why wouldn't some parents go the extra mile and put some real force into it? I know my dad sure as hell did.


"Oh, I was just spanking him! He's just a crybaby!"

With my children: I dont use spanking, but I reserve the right for it. I have yet to encounter a situation where it was needed, but my children know Im not above using it if they defy my other punishments. Of course, I've already been branded worst parent on the block because of the fact that I allow my children to play with toy guns.

You must live around a bunch of prudes...

Have you ever been a parent? If not, you have no right to judge parents.
four times, oldest is an adult in Uni, youngest in grade school...so I guess I do have the right to judge...:D

She turned 2 this past September, so two and a quarter or so.

EDIT: Just because she's perty and I like to show her off:

http://img327.imageshack.us/img327/8383/babyblue22ik.jpg

Very old picture, but that's her.

what a very beautiful child. :)

I have to ask though, earlier you said she "couldn't understand" why she should not do something, I think really you can't hold anything against her when she can't understand what is going on, if she doesn't know the rules she shouldn't be punished for breaking them........that is redirection and very close supervision, and rules that she can understand.

figure out what behavior is acceptable and possible for her, and encourage that.

With my children: I dont use spanking, but I reserve the right for it. I have yet to encounter a situation where it was needed, but my children know Im not above using it if they defy my other punishments. Of course, I've already been branded worst parent on the block because of the fact that I allow my children to play with toy guns.

Anyone who's ever been a child with a sound mind has every right to judge people's parental skills.

Bullshit. You're basing a judgment on what you're reading on a computer screen possibly half the world away when you haven't lived with the kid and seen his or her demeanor or tried to get through to a kid who doesn't seem to listen or seemingly can't process information. That's hypocritical. Plain and simple.

If someone spanks a kid for not listening and then doesn't have to do anything again because the kid understands not to do it again, that's one thing. If a parent takes a belt to a child repeatedly and then has to tell everyone who asks what the belts are for, that's abuse. More to the point, a quick swat on the tush to get a kid to stop isn't abusive.

Have you ever been a parent? If not, you have no right to judge parents.

hmm........I think most of the people on the "anti-spanking" side so far in this thread are parents.

now you're being silly...if you were to use sufficient force to change an adults behaviour it wouldn't be acceptable, but you knew that right?..

if you use the same amount of force on a child that you use on an adult, it would be wrong. Hitting a child is not spanking. Slapping a child is not spanking. yet many people here equate such abuse with spanking. just as silly.

Spanking is a very fine line to walk. too hard, too frequent, and how and where can change it from spanking to abuse to playing around.

two spanks, not hits, not kicks, not hard strikes, but spanks, usually gets the point across. Spanking should NEVER be used as the sole form of punishment and never alone.

and if you need to ask "How much force should be used on a child" then I suggest you don't spank.

people who do use spanking as a form of punishment have to realize that they can and most likely will be called in for abuse. Abuse, like spanking, is a nebulous term that can apply to almost any situation and like abuse, the accuser usually has the public opinion backing them up... whether or not they were actually abused.

as for the law? I agree with it. no one, and I mean NO ONE should be spanking a child under three. same as no one should be shaking any child under three. unfortunatly, this is a law that cannot be enforced proactively, only retroactively.

If someone spanks a kid for not listening and then doesn't have to do anything again because the kid understands not to do it again, that's one thing.
again, there is nothing special and magic about spanking, it's not a quick fix, it's not a "I only have to smack him once" thing, it's a line you set, and every time they do something you are going to have to spank them again........it's the same with any other discipline model, you have to be consistent or it won't work.

2: See above for my reasoning in this thread. If people are willing to fucking defend a guy like my dad for what he did, even when I recite events exactly as they happened almost fifteen years ago, I'm not going to be opening my ears, period.

No, no, hold up. When, I ask you, have I defended your dad?

With my children: I dont use spanking, but I reserve the right for it. I have yet to encounter a situation where it was needed, but my children know Im not above using it if they defy my other punishments. Of course, I've already been branded worst parent on the block because of the fact that I allow my children to play with toy guns.

i let my son have a toy gun when he really wanted one.

then i told him he wasnt allowed to point it at anyone.

he wasnt much interested in it after that.

apparently it's you who has personal problem and can't wrap her head around it, obviously it's to big of a leap for you... You have an inability to be a responsible parent...why try to find a way that does not involve pain to teach my child when I can just hurt them to get my way and pretend I'm a good parent, how nice...

one two year old and you're an expert parent:rolleyes:

Alright. Since your arguments are becoming attacks and slightly absurd, I'll try to forget about you after this post.

First, I am a male.

Second, I never claimed I was an 'expert parent', however I will adamantly state and defend the claim that I am a damned good father and a responsible one. My children want for nothing, have never had more than a swat on the diaper, and love and are loved in return with every ounce of my being that isn't given over to gushing with pride. That is fact, my friend, and not up for negotiation or argument.

Any person who claims to be an 'expert' at parenting is a liar and a fucking poor one since every child and situation is different.

However, coming from a very large family, I've got more experience than most folks. Three younger brothers and two younger sisters which I helped raise definately prepared me for my daughter who in turn prepared me for the boy we had over the summer. So, that's two of my own, plus my siblings, not to mention my whorish older sister's kids. I may not be the shining parent of the year, but I'm damned sure right at home with it.

As for the rest of your drivel, you can go back and look over my other posts in this thread, since I've gone out of my way more than once to clarify that I didn't think that spanking was the only or most appropriate way to discipline. However, I don't think it's wrong or abusive, in moderation, and it definately gets results that seem to be lacking in 99% of children today.

1: Fuck that strawman tactic. I was sitting on the floor, watching TV and eating my hamburger, when I reached to grab some chips. I elbow nudged my glass, and it fell over. Before I could do anything about it, *SMACK*. I was on the floor at that point, when my dad proceeded to scream at me for spilling water on the carpet. Don't think you can use such shallow tactics with people who have memories as clear as mine.that Potarius, is not spanking but being hit. big difference.

2: See above for my reasoning in this thread. If people are willing to fucking defend a guy like my dad for what he did, even when I recite events exactly as they happened almost fifteen years ago, I'm not going to be opening my ears, period.... exactly as they happened? so you were never warned about spilling things or eating in the living room... it was just as it happened, spill - smack, no warning, nothing.

if that is true (since it is your personal experience, and thus I have no other version but yours,) then still, that is not spanking or even discipline, but I would call that abuse. something far different than spanking.

1: Fuck that strawman tactic. I was sitting on the floor, watching TV and eating my hamburger, when I reached to grab some chips. I elbow nudged my glass, and it fell over. Before I could do anything about it, *SMACK*. I was on the floor at that point, when my dad proceeded to scream at me for spilling water on the carpet. Don't think you can use such shallow tactics with people who have memories as clear as mine.

2: See above for my reasoning in this thread. If people are willing to fucking defend a guy like my dad for what he did, even when I recite events exactly as they happened almost fifteen years ago, I'm not going to be opening my ears, period.

I agree and I also recall all to clearly those moments of discipline that were for my own good...about the worst reason I can think of for spanking a child is such as you gave,spilling water on carpet...hitting a for breaking something or whatever...those are only things! a THING should never be held in higher esteem than a child...sure I'll be upset if my little guy breaks an antique but WTF! I'm not going to hit him because of it, it's only a thing, he is far more valuable and I love him too much to hurt him...

Anyone who's ever been a child with a sound mind has every right to judge people's parental skills.

Let's get to the point: I'm against spanking because it opens the door to very hard hitting, even if the default spanking method is used. It happened to me, and fuck knows it happens to a lot of kids.

Your skin turns red from a spank anyway, so why wouldn't some parents go the extra mile and put some real force into it? I know my dad sure as hell did.


"Oh, I was just spanking him! He's just a crybaby!"

yeah. its a good argument for making all spanking illegal. too many parents lose control and beat the tar out of their kids.

back when i was growing up and spanking was a common punishment, way too many parents used belts, hairbrushes, switches, whatever it took to make sure that the spanking really hurt. the kids who got it the most, behaved the worst when their parents werent around. all spanking taught them was to avoid being spanked.

Second, I never claimed I was an 'expert parent', however I will adamantly state and defend the claim that I am a damned good father and a responsible one.

Claim it all you want - I still won't be buying it for a second, since what remains is that you defend the action of hurting children. Basically one of the lowest of the lows.

Alright. Since your arguments are becoming attacks and slightly absurd, I'll try to forget about you after this post.



eew how mature, I turn around your insult and now I'm attacking you and being absurd, that's just wonderful...please do forget about me... as for your huge family....9 brothers and sisters, 39 nieces and nephews, ya I know kids...

That's a fair point and one I try to put into play at every opportunity.

When I said she didn't understand why she shouldn't do something wrong, I was referring to possibly dangerous or utterly unacceptable things. She understands 'No' and probably gets the fact that she shouldn't be doing it, but not the why.

A hasty example: She doesn't understand that the skillet full of oil could scald her eyes from her skull. But, she does know that daddy doesn't want her screwing with it and that any further bothering with it is going to result in a sharp word or a swat on the rump. I'm sure I could redirect her to the toys in the living room, but the problem remains in the kitchen, and would remain a problem unless the fact that it is unacceptable is put into terms she understands.

A feeble swat on the diaper isn't doing damage, aside from teary eyes, but it is showing her that disobedience isn't acceptable will be followed by repercussions. As she grows older, obedience will become secondary to personal judgement, and I hope that my guidance now will prepare her to use that judgement.

Once again, I never whack the shit out of her and turn her loose, relying on force to do my parenting. Any spanking is preceded by warnings and followed by another 'no-no' talk, with an attempt on my part to put the 'why' of it into terms she can understand.

Thanks for the compliments on her. :) She's my pride.

I only say what I do because I love children, I have two of my own, and work with children in many aspects every day.

She may be too young to understand that the stove is hot......or she may understand but need reminding. Children are curious, and 2 year olds have a short attention span. It may be frustrating (strike that, it is frustrating) to keep having to pick them up and redirect them, but it's worth it if they eventually get the message (which will take the same amount of time and energy spanking or not).

what a very beautiful child. :)

I have to ask though, earlier you said she "couldn't understand" why she should not do something, I think really you can't hold anything against her when she can't understand what is going on, if she doesn't know the rules she shouldn't be punished for breaking them........that is redirection and very close supervision, and rules that she can understand.

figure out what behavior is acceptable and possible for her, and encourage that.

That's a fair point and one I try to put into play at every opportunity.

When I said she didn't understand why she shouldn't do something wrong, I was referring to possibly dangerous or utterly unacceptable things. She understands 'No' and probably gets the fact that she shouldn't be doing it, but not the why.

A hasty example: She doesn't understand that the skillet full of oil could scald her eyes from her skull. But, she does know that daddy doesn't want her screwing with it and that any further bothering with it is going to result in a sharp word or a swat on the rump. I'm sure I could redirect her to the toys in the living room, but the problem remains in the kitchen, and would remain a problem unless the fact that it is unacceptable is put into terms she understands.

A feeble swat on the diaper isn't doing damage, aside from teary eyes, but it is showing her that disobedience isn't acceptable will be followed by repercussions. As she grows older, obedience will become secondary to personal judgement, and I hope that my guidance now will prepare her to use that judgement.

Once again, I never whack the shit out of her and turn her loose, relying on force to do my parenting. Any spanking is preceded by warnings and followed by another 'no-no' talk, with an attempt on my part to put the 'why' of it into terms she can understand.

Thanks for the compliments on her. :) She's my pride.

Alright. Since your arguments are becoming attacks and slightly absurd, I'll try to forget about you after this post.

First, I am a male.

Second, I never claimed I was an 'expert parent', however I will adamantly state and defend the claim that I am a damned good father and a responsible one. My children want for nothing, have never had more than a swat on the diaper, and love and are loved in return with every ounce of my being that isn't given over to gushing with pride. That is fact, my friend, and not up for negotiation or argument.

Any person who claims to be an 'expert' at parenting is a liar and a fucking poor one since every child and situation is different.

However, coming from a very large family, I've got more experience than most folks. Three younger brothers and two younger sisters which I helped raise definately prepared me for my daughter who in turn prepared me for the boy we had over the summer. So, that's two of my own, plus my siblings, not to mention my whorish older sister's kids. I may not be the shining parent of the year, but I'm damned sure right at home with it.

As for the rest of your drivel, you can go back and look over my other posts in this thread, since I've gone out of my way more than once to clarify that I didn't think that spanking was the only or most appropriate way to discipline. However, I don't think it's wrong or abusive, in moderation, and it definately gets results that seem to be lacking in 99% of children today.


where parents go wrong is not in not punishing their kids, its in not being consistent. they dont set down rules and enforce them.

the average bad parent sits in front of the tv drinking a beer ignoring their kids until they get so out of hand that daddy cant hear the tv anymore. so he yells at them to cut it out. nothing changes. he yells again. nothing changes. he yells again.

after half an hour or so he gets his ass off the couch and goes into the room where the kids are like the wrath of god and hands out whatever punishment seems appropriate.

yeah they dont like the punishment but they had an hour and a half or so of misbehaving before it comes. they are being trained to misbehave.

or worse yet

you go to the store and your kid pitches a fit because she wants a new doll. you give it to her to shut her up. she gets home and demands a cookie. you say no, she cries for 20 minutes THEN you cant take it any more and you give her a cookie.

youve just created a monster. (not YOU you, i doubt you would do something so stupid)

you dont need to spank your child to get her to not be a little brat. you just need to not let her get away with breaking the rules. sometimes she will be an angel; sometimes you will wonder if she is the devil's spawn. thats just the way children develop. in the end, if you are consistent, she will grow up to be a happy healthy adult who knows how to behave in the world. that is the goal after all.

youve just created a monster. (not YOU you, i doubt you would do something so stupid)

you dont need to spank your child to get her to not be a little brat. you just need to not let her get away with breaking the rules.

Ah, that sounds familiar.

So, let's say this does happen, what then?

Claim it all you want - I still won't be buying it for a second, since what remains is that you defend the action of hurting children. Basically one of the lowest of the lows.

*yawn*

I've never defended the hurting of children. Discipline? Sure, but the day I 'hurt' my children is the day I empty my skull, folks. A few tears and an hour of sulking is well worth the price, for me, of instilling discipline, right and wrong.

For some reason half of you seem to equate a swat on the ass with a fucking brutal beat-down, which is simply absurd. I had my licks from my father, who was quite the asshole, so I'm plenty capable of judging how much is too much.

Thankfully, I'll never have to use that judgement, since any more than a half-hearted whack would rend my soul far worse than any damage done to my kids.

*yawn*

I've never defended the hurting of children. Discipline? Sure, but the day I 'hurt' my children is the day I empty my skull, folks. A few tears and an hour of sulking is well worth the price, for me, of instilling discipline, right and wrong.

For some reason half of you seem to equate a swat on the ass with a fucking brutal beat-down, which is simply absurd. I had my licks from my father, who was quite the asshole, so I'm plenty capable of judging how much is too much.

Thankfully, I'll never have to use that judgement, since any more than a half-hearted whack would rend my soul far worse than any damage done to my kids.

Very well said.

Ah, that sounds familiar.

So, let's say this does happen, what then?

cut them off cold turkey.

Ah, that sounds familiar.

So, let's say this does happen, what then?

for most families your life is hell until your kids leave home. and you hope they dont go from your home to prison.

if you want to go from monster to well behaved child it will take years of consistent discipline. you have to be ultra consistent in keeping the rules.


it still doesnt require spanking. spanking is just a technique.

its SO much easier if you do it right from the beginning.

*yawn*

I've never defended the hurting of children. Discipline? Sure, but the day I 'hurt' my children is the day I empty my skull, folks. A few tears and an hour of sulking is well worth the price, for me, of instilling discipline, right and wrong.

You defend inflicting pain and physical suffering on a child - newsflash, that is hurting a child, your feeble attempts to hide the truth of it from yourself with euphemisms of "discipline" (the word choice of which is also telling, because it has perpetually been the favourite semantic refuge of scoundrel parents) notwithstanding. And that right there is why I don't buy your claims of being a good parent at all. Your own words sweep away what seems to be an affirmation you need to repeat not to prove anything to us, but to yourself. Too bad not all people can be so easily fooled, eh?

for most families your life is hell until your kids leave home. and you hope they dont go from your home to prison.

if you want to go from monster to well behaved child it will take years of consistent discipline. you have to be ultra consistent in keeping the rules.


it still doesnt require spanking. spanking is just a technique.

its SO much easier if you do it right from the beginning.

"your life is hell", very true...ohhh! those puberty years are wonderful:eek: , makes you nostalgic for the days when they spilt their milk on the carpet...

"your life is hell", very true...ohhh! those puberty years are wonderful:eek: , makes you nostalgic for the days when they spilt their milk on the carpet...

I don't even want to think about life 10 years from now........a 13 year old and a 15 year old running around here........why couldn't I have had sons?:p

"your life is hell", very true...ohhh! those puberty years are wonderful:eek: , makes you nostalgic for the days when they spilt their milk on the carpet...

yeah you think its bad when your 2 year old looks you in the face and says "NO!"

12 years later you are longing for a problem so easy to deal with.

im not sure that its possible to ensure a smooth adolescence with good parenting. the best you can hope for is that they survive to adulthood. then if you were a good parent, they will be good adults.

You defend inflicting pain and physical suffering on a child - newsflash, that is hurting a child, your feeble attempts to hide the truth of it from yourself with euphemisms of "discipline" (the word choice of which is also telling, because it has perpetually been the favourite semantic refuge of scoundrel parents) notwithstanding. And that right there is why I don't buy your claims of being a good parent at all. Your own words sweep away what seems to be an affirmation you need to repeat not to prove anything to us, but to yourself. Too bad not all people can be so easily fooled, eh?

The fact that you automatically lump be in with 'scoundrel parents' for speaking of discipline is laughable and pretty much negates your argument, but I'll play along. What is too bad is the fact that people like you can't put aside your own pre-conceived notions long enough to have a civil conversation with someone who obviously isn't a child-beating monster.

Here's a newsflash of my own: I don't inflict pain and physical suffering on my kids. You can throw that nonsense up in the air all you want but it doesn't make it valid.

I give them spankings. Spankings. And half-assed spankings at that. It's the act that is effective, not the physical force behind it. For the ten-thousandth fucking time in this thread: Spanking does not equal abuse. No. No. No. It can, if you're a monstrous asshole without an iota of self restraint, but thankfully I'm not of that cast and know it, myself, to be true.

Again, if a spanking or two as a kid is enough to destroy your mental stability and turn you into a lunatic or child-abuser, you were already doomed to failure as a person. It sucks that some people were beaten and emotionally scarred but that doesn't happen from a spanking and it's damn sure not going on in my home.

*yawn*

I've never defended the hurting of children. Discipline? Sure, but the day I 'hurt' my children is the day I empty my skull, folks. A few tears and an hour of sulking is well worth the price, for me, of instilling discipline, right and wrong.

For some reason half of you seem to equate a swat on the ass with a fucking brutal beat-down, which is simply absurd. I had my licks from my father, who was quite the asshole, so I'm plenty capable of judging how much is too much.

Thankfully, I'll never have to use that judgement, since any more than a half-hearted whack would rend my soul far worse than any damage done to my kids.

Why wouldn't you defend this sort of minimal harm to your children as being beneficial to them in preventing them from greater harm? I would be quite content to defend swatting a child's hand or butt to prevent them from all sorts of harms, including burns, broken bones, blowing their own head off playing with a gun, etc.

I don't even want to think about life 10 years from now........a 13 year old and a 15 year old running around here........why couldn't I have had sons?:p

im sure they will plague you in ways you havent every thought of.

unless your mother put the mothers curse on you.... the one where she curses you with children who will be just like you were in your teen years.

Why wouldn't you defend this sort of minimal harm to your children as being beneficial to them in preventing them from greater harm? I would be quite content to defend swatting a child's hand or butt to prevent them from all sorts of harms, including burns, broken bones, blowing their own head off playing with a gun, etc.

yeah but you dont keep your child safe from burns by spanking her. you keep her safe from burns by keeping her away from fire until she is old enough to know better.

it would be the height of folly to think that you can keep your child away from your gun because she fears being spanked. thats the way your child ends up dead. you keep a child safe from guns by keeping your gun locked and away from your child.

Watch who you call a tard. Smunkee is a great mother and disciplines her children plenty. She just doesn't believe in spanking and you should respect that as she should respect your right to spank.

Your absolutely correct. I do respect her right not to spank. I disagree with this bill though and think the gov't should respect a parents choice to spank or not to spank. There is a difference between spanking a child and child abuse. It is wrong for any politician or outside organization to tell any parent how to raise and/or discipline their child. You raise yours how you like and I will raise mine how I like and as long as a child is not abused no one has a right to say how it is done. But too many people in this country prefer to stick their nose into other peoples bussiness where it does not belong.

Sorry, I am done venting . Thank you for your time everyone.

I don't even want to think about life 10 years from now........a 13 year old and a 15 year old running around here........why couldn't I have had sons?:p
you wanna be even more tired?

*thinks about the running around with his nephews vs neices...*

oi... I gotta lie down now...

*yawn*

I've never defended the hurting of children. Discipline? Sure, but the day I 'hurt' my children is the day I empty my skull, folks. A few tears and an hour of sulking is well worth the price, for me, of instilling discipline, right and wrong.

For some reason half of you seem to equate a swat on the ass with a fucking brutal beat-down, which is simply absurd. I had my licks from my father, who was quite the asshole, so I'm plenty capable of judging how much is too much.

Thankfully, I'll never have to use that judgement, since any more than a half-hearted whack would rend my soul far worse than any damage done to my kids.


Exactly you could not put it into any better words then I could think of and you hit the nail on the head.....a swat is not a beating. But it does get their attention.

I am sure your a great parent, and sounds like raising my own child who who knows if i start counting that wheni get to three they will get that swat....he is 12 now and I can count the number of times I have had to swat him after the first time on one hand. After I started that when I counted he listened and knew I was serious.

yeah but you dont keep your child safe from burns by spanking her. you keep her safe from burns by keeping her away from fire until she is old enough to know better.

it would be the height of folly to think that you can keep your child away from your gun because she fears being spanked. thats the way your child ends up dead. you keep a child safe from guns by keeping your gun locked and away from your child.

Not at all. Some children do sufficiently fear a spanking that they will indeed follow the rules set by their parents, whether those rules be with regard to guns or otherwise.

Other children have a stronger...inherent curiosity, one might say. For such children, spanking may be quite ineffective.

My concern with parenting strategies is not that they be fitted to a false ideal of eschewing physical punishment and replacing it with what is often a more painful emotional punishment (such as a time-out or a removal of privileges), but that parenting strategies be suited to the personality of the child and that the more significantly important aspects of parenting such as open communication and genuine healthy affection along with verbal and material encouragement of the child in healthy behaviors be the focus of the parent.

My concern with parenting strategies is not that they be fitted to a false ideal of eschewing physical punishment and replacing it with what is often a more painful emotional punishment (such as a time-out or a removal of privileges), but that parenting strategies be suited to the personality of the child and that the more significantly important aspects of parenting such as open communication and genuine healthy affection along with verbal and material encouragement of the child in healthy behaviors be the focus of the parent.


My concern with parenting strategies is not that they be fitted to a false ideal of eschewing physical punishment and replacing it with what is often a more painful emotional punishment (such as a time-out or a removal of privileges), but that parenting strategies be suited to the personality of the child and that the more significantly important aspects of parenting such as open communication and genuine healthy affection along with verbal and material encouragement of the child in healthy behaviors be the focus of the parent.

That's two times for wisdom.

yeah you think its bad when your 2 year old looks you in the face and says "NO!"

12 years later you are longing for a problem so easy to deal with.

im not sure that its possible to ensure a smooth adolescence with good parenting. the best you can hope for is that they survive to adulthood. then if you were a good parent, they will be good adults.

I never realized how easy it was to raise wee little kids until I had teenagers with PMS, spanking little one's is just so absurd once you've dealt with real problems...

my oldest after some early bizarre behaviour is becoming an awesome adult, another has past the danger point and now headed the same way, a third was never a problem...number 4, early days yet....

Not at all. Some children do sufficiently fear a spanking that they will indeed follow the rules set by their parents, whether those rules be with regard to guns or otherwise.

Other children have a stronger...inherent curiosity, one might say. For such children, spanking may be quite ineffective.

My concern with parenting strategies is not that they be fitted to a false ideal of eschewing physical punishment and replacing it with what is often a more painful emotional punishment (such as a time-out or a removal of privileges), but that parenting strategies be suited to the personality of the child and that the more significantly important aspects of parenting such as open communication and genuine healthy affection along with verbal and material encouragement of the child in healthy behaviors be the focus of the parent.


really, its not a choice between physical abuse and mental abuse

its just as bad to use painful emotional punishments

and still, NEVER LEAVE YOUR GUN WHERE YOUR CHILD MIGHT GET TO IT.

there is no sense taking that risk eh?

I never realized how easy it was to raise wee little kids until I had teenagers with PMS, spanking little one's is just so absurd once you've dealt with real problems...

my oldest after some early bizarre behaviour is becoming an awesome adult, another has past the danger point and now headed the same way, a third was never a problem...number 4, early days yet....

the teen years are so scary. congratulations on faring so well so far.

considering how agile those little rug monkeys are, and what they can get into, where would that be? besides a safe with both an alpha numerical keypad as well as a key lock?

The better rule would be (pardon for the caps) NEVER LEAVE YOUR GUN LOADED AND ALWAYS KEEP A TRIGGER GUARD ON IT!

my guns are 15 miles away from my house......locked up, unloaded, guarded by real life rent-a-cops.

I think my kids should be okay. :cool:

and still, NEVER LEAVE YOUR GUN WHERE YOUR CHILD MIGHT GET TO IT.
considering how agile those little rug monkeys are, and what they can get into, where would that be? besides a safe with both an alpha numerical keypad as well as a key lock?

The better rule would be (pardon for the caps) NEVER LEAVE YOUR GUN LOADED AND ALWAYS KEEP A TRIGGER GUARD ON IT!

Not at all. Some children do sufficiently fear a spanking that they will indeed follow the rules set by their parents, whether those rules be with regard to guns or otherwise.

Other children have a stronger...inherent curiosity, one might say. For such children, spanking may be quite ineffective.

My concern with parenting strategies is not that they be fitted to a false ideal of eschewing physical punishment and replacing it with what is often a more painful emotional punishment (such as a time-out or a removal of privileges), but that parenting strategies be suited to the personality of the child and that the more significantly important aspects of parenting such as open communication and genuine healthy affection along with verbal and material encouragement of the child in healthy behaviors be the focus of the parent.

all true, very good...for me spanking is never an option there is always a better way, spanking is just a lazy shortcut...and yes emotional punishment can also be much more painful...being a good parent is a balancing act finding the right method for every child...

That's two times for wisdom.

Thank you for the compliment. It's not often that I receive them.

really, its not a choice between physical abuse and mental abuse

its just as bad to use painful emotional punishments

Indeed. That was very much my point. The debate over physical punishment and other forms of punishment lead to a false dilemma, with the underlying assumption that punishment is a significant part of a parenting strategy. It is my contention that punishment should be a very small portion of any parenting strategy, and that when punishment is administered it should be appropriate and effective for the child in question.

and still, NEVER LEAVE YOUR GUN WHERE YOUR CHILD MIGHT GET TO IT.

there is no sense taking that risk eh?

Madame, I do not even own a gun, and little desire to acquire one. I was simply using that as an example of a child being harmed as a result of their own curiosity.

considering how agile those little rug monkeys are, and what they can get into, where would that be? besides a safe with both an alpha numerical keypad as well as a key lock?

The better rule would be (pardon for the caps) NEVER LEAVE YOUR GUN LOADED AND ALWAYS KEEP A TRIGGER GUARD ON IT!

you probably shouldnt have a gun in the house when you have kids but i understand why people do.

keeping it unloaded, bullets in a seperate location. trigger lock locked, in a safe, MIGHT keep your kids from shooting themselves. as you say, the little buggers are resourceful and a gun is a great temptation for many kids.

I still contend that if a child isn't trained between 1 and 6 they never will be and that is a loss for all society.

I also contend that those who are furthest from nature and from the care and training of animals don't have a clue how to train children.

I still contend that if a child isn't trained between 1 and 6 they never will be and that is a loss for all society.

I also contend that those who are furthest from nature and from the care and training of animals don't have a clue how to train children.

ya ya you and dogs.

a child does need structure and consistency in order to grow up happy and productive.

but is it a loss if my son never would jump through the flaming hoop no matter how hard i beat him?

Not necessarily, no. I've known plenty of parents who used a spanking as discipline every once and a while. Very few were bad parents. The one woman I met who beat her kids lost custody of them - and a good thing, too.



If you use an implement, you've probably crossed the line into beatings. If you hit more than once or twice, you've probably crossed the line into beatings. If you leave physical signs, unless you have a child that bruises very easily, you've crossed the line.

A spanking is not supposed to cause actual physical harm.

Just emotional harm, then?

which is why I have neither. Gun or kids. :p

you will some day, junii (the kids not the gun) and when you do im sure you will be a very good dad.

I still contend that if a child isn't trained between 1 and 6 they never will be and that is a loss for all society.

I also contend that those who are furthest from nature and from the care and training of animals don't have a clue how to train children.

I should probably leave this alone again right?

you probably shouldnt have a gun in the house when you have kids but i understand why people do.

keeping it unloaded, bullets in a seperate location. trigger lock locked, in a safe, MIGHT keep your kids from shooting themselves. as you say, the little buggers are resourceful and a gun is a great temptation for many kids.

which is why I have neither. Gun or kids. :p

my guns are 15 miles away from my house......locked up, unloaded, guarded by real life rent-a-cops.

I think my kids should be okay. :cool:

nooooo.... don't you know that kids can always outfox rent-a-cops! haven't you seen all those family films! :p

I should probably leave this alone again right?

Yes. I certainly will be, because discussing the relevant similarities and differences between human children and other animals would likely derail the topic significantly.

For some reason half of you seem to equate a swat on the ass with a fucking brutal beat-down, which is simply absurd. I had my licks from my father, who was quite the asshole, so I'm plenty capable of judging how much is too much.

Thankfully, I'll never have to use that judgement, since any more than a half-hearted whack would rend my soul far worse than any damage done to my kids.
I must admit that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of spanking a child below the age of three, seeing as how I'm not convinced that he / she would know or understand why she recieved that kind of punishment.

Regardless of that, let's for now agree that you know where to draw the line between a harmless swat and a hit / beating / what-shall-we-call-it.

Does your neighbour?

Seems to me that there are many people out there who aren't able to draw the line, seen from an outside-perspective. What I might see as a beatdown or abuse might be another persons "harmless swatting". Some people don't know their own strength, some overestimate how much a baby can take, some loose control. This kind of law will help combat abuse in an efficient manner, and you who can see the line between a swat and a hit clearly will most likely never be prosecuted as long as you don't hit the baby outside your own home.

(Oh, and cute kid btw. ;) )

I must admit that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of spanking a child below the age of three, seeing as how I'm not convinced that he / she would know or understand why she recieved that kind of punishment.

Regardless of that, let's for now agree that you know where to draw the line between a harmless swat and a hit / beating / what-shall-we-call-it.

Does your neighbour?

Seems to me that there are many people out there who aren't able to draw the line, seen from an outside-perspective. What I might see as a beatdown or abuse might be another persons "harmless swatting". Some people don't know their own strength, some overestimate how much a baby can take, some loose control. This kind of law will help combat abuse in an efficient manner, and you who can see the line between a swat and a hit clearly will most likely never be prosecuted as long as you don't hit the baby outside your own home.

(Oh, and cute kid btw. ;) )that's the problem.

so what's the solution? a blanket ban on any form of physical violence? what if that moves to the mental violence. "nothing that will harm the self esteem and mental growth of a child though actions that are deemed traumatic..." so time outs now become illegal since it can be traumatising to a child. Denying a child anything can damage their confidence and self esteem so you can't say no to their demands... where would the line be drawn.

normally, bruising is considered crossing the line. anything worse than bruising (cuts, contusions, broken bones) fall under abuse since there is no discipline action that would result in those types of injuries. Yes there are ways to physically abuse a child and not show damage, but that would show intent to hide the abuse and ergo, abuse.

Does your neighbour?

Seems to me that there are many people out there who aren't able to draw the line, seen from an outside-perspective. What I might see as a beatdown or abuse might be another persons "harmless swatting". Some people don't know their own strength, some overestimate how much a baby can take, some loose control. This kind of law will help combat abuse in an efficient manner, and you who can see the line between a swat and a hit clearly will most likely never be prosecuted as long as you don't hit the baby outside your own home.

(Oh, and cute kid btw. ;) )

Thanks.

I agree that the 'heart' of this law is in the right place, but I don't agree with any sort of implementation that I could think of.

Does my neighbor know how to light his stove without blowing himself, his kids, and all his shit up? Does my neighbor drink gallons of gin, smoke meth or eat kittens? Does he enjoy midget erotica?

It would be a bummer if he did, but in the end it's not my problem. If I saw someone all out assaulting a child I would definately call the cops and try to do everything in my power to see it stopped forever, no doubt. But, in the end it is for personal responsibility to see that child abuse is stopped, not sweeping laws that could see a decent parent tossed in a cell for giving their kid a much-deserved spanking, while piss-poor parents let their kids run hog ass wild without so much as a stern word.

A touchy issue, to be sure.

that's the problem.

so what's the solution? a blanket ban on any form of physical violence? what if that moves to the mental violence. "nothing that will harm the self esteem and mental growth of a child though actions that are deemed traumatic..." so time outs now become illegal since it can be traumatising to a child. Denying a child anything can damage their confidence and self esteem so you can't say no to their demands... where would the line be drawn.

normally, bruising is considered crossing the line. anything worse than bruising (cuts, contusions, broken bones) fall under abuse since there is no discipline action that would result in those types of injuries. Yes there are ways to physically abuse a child and not show damage, but that would show intent to hide the abuse and ergo, abuse.

you know I love you JuNii, but slippery slope much?

I'm going to support this law for the sheer reason that it would help my plan to world, or at least United States, domination. Think about it, if this keep up, eventually police are going to be banned from carrying guns or anything that can be used to cause pain. Shortly following this, the military will be disbanded, and then me and a small group of friends can conquer the nation by going into a rage and hitting anyone who disagrees with us.

I like pancakes too.

That bill is stupid, i understand saying no EXCESSIVE spanking (like leaving horrible bruising etc) but no spanking altogether?? A child under 3 probably wont understand you trying to explain why something is wrong, like "Dont run out on to that road, you will get hurt". What they do understand is a small amount of pain.

+1

although one has to chuckle when you see the origin of the bill...only in cali

must be pretty easy to enforce also.

the spank police are out on patrol...be wary.


kidding aside,it is rediculous to tell parents how to raise their own kids,obviously beating on your kids requires intervention.

check her bio out(the sponsor)oddly she has no kids?

guess she just likes to tell others what to do and how to act!

Parents have to take responsibility somewhere. perhaps a test before they have children?

there is no guarentee that the parents will be "good" parents until they have children. we (Society) can watch and react, but do we have the right to dictate how a parent raises their child?

Remember how you felt when your neighbors critisied your child-raising techniques and choice of educators? now imagine the government doing that.

Bruising (and other physical evidence) is the best line for abuse. there is physical evidence that is documentable. a spank won't cause bruising. redness, yes, but bruising no. same with welts (a type of bruising) no spanking could make welts or bruises unless it crosses into hitting which is, as I stated, not spanking.

Discipline, like a gun, knife, or anything else, requires responsibility when used. one cannot assume that a gun in the house means a redneck, or a bottle of alcohol means that the person is a alcoholic, and one cannot assume that a person who believes in spanking will beat the shit out of their child.

and when it comes to my having children, the forms of discipline would be one thing I would discuss with my wife and an agreement would be made. Discipline should be consistant and not with just one parent but with both.

and to reiterate, I am for the bill since it does state that spanking a child under three is illegal.

I agree 100%, however, I would argue that a responsible parent doesn't hurt their child.

you know I love you JuNii, but slippery slope much?
yes, I know you do Smunkee. and I love you too. :fluffle:

Parents have to take responsibility somewhere. perhaps a test before they have children?

there is no guarentee that the parents will be "good" parents until they have children. we (Society) can watch and react, but do we have the right to dictate how a parent raises their child?

Bruising (and other physical evidence) is the best line for abuse. there is physical evidence that is documentable. a spank won't cause bruising. redness, yes, but bruising no. same with welts (a type of bruising) no spanking could make welts or bruises unless it crosses into hitting which is, as I stated, not spanking.

Discipline, like a gun, knife, or anything else, requires responsibility when used. one cannot assume that a gun in the house means a redneck, or a bottle of alcohol means that the person is a alcoholic, and one cannot assume that a person who believes in spanking will beat the shit out of their child.

and when it comes to my having children, the forms of discipline would be one thing I would discuss with my wife and an agreement would be made. Discipline should be consistant and not with just one parent but with both.

and to reiterate, I am for the bill since it does state that spanking a child under three is illegal.

I can't praise you enough for saying this. Finally, somebody who will fucking side with me on this issue.

Being spanked, slapped, and hit as a child, I can safely say that it didn't help in the least... Especially that time I got drop kicked into my room after playing in a puddle of water.

In fairness, though, that's not what people mean when they refer to spanking. That's a beating.

A spank is usually no more than a swat to the behind, just hard enough to get someone's attention. CERTAINLY not hard enough to leave a mark!

Spanking is a tool. It can be overused and abused. Because of this, an idiot in California (no surprise) wants to ban it. Now, while I agree that babies shouldn't be spanked (kids under a year just aren't going to get it, all they know is that someone they trusted hurt them), sometimes a swat across the rear is needed. There are children who are impervious to restriction, isolation, deprivation of privileges, grounding, etc.; they do, however, understand a well-placed, properly timed swat. This ban would be like making hammers illegal because someone used a hammer to kill someone. There are laws against child abuse in place - they need to be properly and consistently enforced. Another law is not going to help.

the older the child the more severe the spanking has to be in order to get any results. what works for the 2.5 year old who is wearing diapers certainly wont work for a 15 year old.

this is one reason why most parents stop spanking their children after age 7 or so.

In other words, tailoring the technique for changing the child's behavior as appropriate for their level of understanding/effectiveness.

Spanking is a tool. It can be overused and abused. Because of this, an idiot in California (no surprise) wants to ban it. Now, while I agree that babies shouldn't be spanked (kids under a year just aren't going to get it, all they know is that someone they trusted hurt them), sometimes a swat across the rear is needed. There are children who are impervious to restriction, isolation, deprivation of privileges, grounding, etc.; they do, however, understand a well-placed, properly timed swat. This ban would be like making hammers illegal because someone used a hammer to kill someone. There are laws against child abuse in place - they need to be properly and consistently enforced. Another law is not going to help.

And then they'll never pee on the carpet or chew the furniture again. :rolleyes:

In fairness, though, that's not what people mean when they refer to spanking. That's a beating.

A spank is usually no more than a swat to the behind, just hard enough to get someone's attention. CERTAINLY not hard enough to leave a mark!

i would say thats an accurate description of a spank.

i would say that as you describe a spank, is perfectly acceptable...a beating certainly not.

Spanking is a tool. It can be overused and abused. Because of this, an idiot in California (no surprise) wants to ban it. Now, while I agree that babies shouldn't be spanked (kids under a year just aren't going to get it, all they know is that someone they trusted hurt them), sometimes a swat across the rear is needed. There are children who are impervious to restriction, isolation, deprivation of privileges, grounding, etc.; they do, however, understand a well-placed, properly timed swat. This ban would be like making hammers illegal because someone used a hammer to kill someone. There are laws against child abuse in place - they need to be properly and consistently enforced. Another law is not going to help.

Amen!

i don't know how they going to force it,love to heard how if it pasts

good to see people know to keep guns away from kids

I don't think the bill goes far enough. You should never hit anyone, especially your children. If spanking is the only way you can control your child, you are not fit to be a parent.

I don't think the bill goes far enough. You should never hit anyone, especially your children. If spanking is the only way you can control your child, you are not fit to be a parent.

QFT

In other words, tailoring the technique for changing the child's behavior as appropriate for their level of understanding/effectiveness.

no

in other words its a bad technique that has to be dropped before it goes too far.

I don't think the bill goes far enough. You should never hit anyone, especially your children. If spanking is the only way you can control your child, you are not fit to be a parent.

If you don't train your children between one and six (before they have many language skills) you are not only not fit to be a parent you aren't fit to be a member of society because you are turning another untrained person into the world. That is why we have a shortage of civil people since Dr. Spock's experiment on mankind.