Smacking Children
-
Pressure is growing for parents to be banned from smacking children amid fears that abusers use current laws to excuse their actions. Two parliamentary reports out on Tuesday call for a change in the law in England and Wales, which allows adults to use what is known as reasonable chastisement. According to the health select committee and the joint committee on human rights, that legal defence has too often been used to excuse violence against children. Anyone have any views on this? Personally I do support smacking children - but by smacking I obviously don't condone excessive violence.... (Full Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3015226.stm[^]) "Now I guess I'll sit back and watch people misinterpret what I just said......" Christian Graus At The Soapbox
How funny - posted something similar in the SB earlier :) Having been smacked in a disciplined, yet loving manner, as a kid, I do support smacking. Obviously not beating. However, I could not bring up my children in a country where there was a law against giving them a hiding.
Look at the world about you and trust to your own convictions. - Ansel Adams
-
How did this happen??? They obviously where not thrashed into submission enough when they were young.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South AfricaChris Losinger wrote: i hate needles so much i can't even imagine allowing one near The Little Programmer
:rolleyes: Ryan Being little and getting pushed around by big guys all my life I guess I compensate by pushing electrons and holes around. What a bully I am, but I do enjoy making subatomic particles hop at my bidding - Roger Wright (2nd April 2003, The Lounge)
Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late - John Nichol "Point Of Impact" -
I would have to agree that children are getting too much power in our time. Some children know that if mommy or daddy disciplines me, I can cry child abuse and have it my way. Again, on the other side of the coin, there are parents who can't be parents. You can drive if you have a license, but anyone can have kids. Perhaps maybe, you should have a license or take a course when having kids. Just my two cents in Canada, Keenan
Keenan wrote: Perhaps maybe, you should have a license or take a course when having kids That might sound like a good idea at first, but the problem comes when you decide who gets passes and who fails at being parents. Unlike driving, raising kids is infinitely more harder and complex. Who can say whether doing one thing will make the kid better or worse. There are people who've gone through the same childhood experience, yet come out different. Maybe it's luck ? Plus having a driving licence doesn't mean you're a better driver than those who don't. It just means you know how to operate it. 2 shillings worth( thought I'd get regional ;P) Nick Seng (the programmer formerly known as Notorious SMC)
God, I pity me! - Phoncible P. Bone
-
Pressure is growing for parents to be banned from smacking children amid fears that abusers use current laws to excuse their actions. Two parliamentary reports out on Tuesday call for a change in the law in England and Wales, which allows adults to use what is known as reasonable chastisement. According to the health select committee and the joint committee on human rights, that legal defence has too often been used to excuse violence against children. Anyone have any views on this? Personally I do support smacking children - but by smacking I obviously don't condone excessive violence.... (Full Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3015226.stm[^]) "Now I guess I'll sit back and watch people misinterpret what I just said......" Christian Graus At The Soapbox
I think people forget the difference between smacking and beating, so I'll summarise: - - A smack is not designed to hurt, it's supposed to shock the child more than (physically) hurt it - A smack is intended for disciplinary and educational purposes, small children don't understand reasoning - they don't have enough grey cells for that yet - A beating on the other hand is a premeditated, vicious, hate filled, unprovoked physical attack on another human being "designed" to cause them as much physical and emotional distress as possible. - There is not a fine line between the two, they are widly different, that difference is distinct and clear Phil Harding
-
Pressure is growing for parents to be banned from smacking children amid fears that abusers use current laws to excuse their actions. Two parliamentary reports out on Tuesday call for a change in the law in England and Wales, which allows adults to use what is known as reasonable chastisement. According to the health select committee and the joint committee on human rights, that legal defence has too often been used to excuse violence against children. Anyone have any views on this? Personally I do support smacking children - but by smacking I obviously don't condone excessive violence.... (Full Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3015226.stm[^]) "Now I guess I'll sit back and watch people misinterpret what I just said......" Christian Graus At The Soapbox
RichardGrimmer wrote: Anyone have any views on this? Yep. I support it as long as it doesn't get out of control. Ryan Being little and getting pushed around by big guys all my life I guess I compensate by pushing electrons and holes around. What a bully I am, but I do enjoy making subatomic particles hop at my bidding - Roger Wright (2nd April 2003, The Lounge)
Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late - John Nichol "Point Of Impact" -
This is ridiculous - another example of the Nanny state (pardon the pun!). And how will they enforce this exactly??? Thin end of the wedge - give it 10 years and you'll probably be arrested for shouting at your children when they start playing up in the supermarket. I was smacked as a child when I was really naughty (smacked, not beaten!) and it didn't do me any harm. Sure, some parents go too far but I don't think legislation like this isn't going to help. I'm getting sick of the state creeping into every aspect of our lives. I was full of hope when New Labour came to power in 1997 and now I am totally sick of them. I never thought I'd hear myself say that the Tories could win the next election, but at the rate Blair and co. are going they are handing it to them on a plate (and the rise of the right-wing in the UK is something to be worried about IMHO). What a mess - Blair has finally lost all touch with reality like the rest of his government. What a choice we have - the Tories (average age 65) who still have some dewy-eyed 1950s vision of Britain, The LibDems who will say absolutely anything people want to hear (because they know they'll never be in power), and New Labour who have their head shoved up their backsides and have dropped the ball on nearly every major issue since coming to power. How did this happen???
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
If the parent is that cruel enough that they would batter their own child. Eventhough that laws forbid them to abuse them physically. They would most likely to find another way to abuse them in other way. The problem is the parent and not the law. Just my 2 cents
-
I would have to agree that children are getting too much power in our time. Some children know that if mommy or daddy disciplines me, I can cry child abuse and have it my way. Again, on the other side of the coin, there are parents who can't be parents. You can drive if you have a license, but anyone can have kids. Perhaps maybe, you should have a license or take a course when having kids. Just my two cents in Canada, Keenan
Keenan wrote: take a course when having kids. We did - it really helps to understand that, though children are all different, the stages of child development don't change. As the cold war era Observer Corp used to say - "forewarned is forearmed";) "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?" - Albert Einstein
-
Do you realized that this is the 5th time I found parallel post subjects in both the SoapBox and the Lounge and approximately the same time. Does anyone else find this interesting?Or is it just me ? Nick Seng (the programmer formerly known as Notorious SMC)
God, I pity me! - Phoncible P. Bone
Nick Seng wrote: Does anyone else find this interesting? It's really very simple. The Lounge thread is for talking about smacking, and the Soapbox one is for talking smack :-D -- Ian Darling
-
I think people forget the difference between smacking and beating, so I'll summarise: - - A smack is not designed to hurt, it's supposed to shock the child more than (physically) hurt it - A smack is intended for disciplinary and educational purposes, small children don't understand reasoning - they don't have enough grey cells for that yet - A beating on the other hand is a premeditated, vicious, hate filled, unprovoked physical attack on another human being "designed" to cause them as much physical and emotional distress as possible. - There is not a fine line between the two, they are widly different, that difference is distinct and clear Phil Harding
I would venture to guess that most beatings are not premeditated. Most people that beat kids, don't plan it before hand.
-
Nick Seng wrote: Does anyone else find this interesting? It's really very simple. The Lounge thread is for talking about smacking, and the Soapbox one is for talking smack :-D -- Ian Darling
Dang, I thought the Soapbox was for using smack*. :) * Street slang for heroin.
-
Pressure is growing for parents to be banned from smacking children amid fears that abusers use current laws to excuse their actions. Two parliamentary reports out on Tuesday call for a change in the law in England and Wales, which allows adults to use what is known as reasonable chastisement. According to the health select committee and the joint committee on human rights, that legal defence has too often been used to excuse violence against children. Anyone have any views on this? Personally I do support smacking children - but by smacking I obviously don't condone excessive violence.... (Full Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3015226.stm[^]) "Now I guess I'll sit back and watch people misinterpret what I just said......" Christian Graus At The Soapbox
If a kid is acting like as ass, you need to give 'em a good smack. Kids don't really listen to reason. I mean, first you try telling them to calm down, but when that doesn't work, give 'em a good smack. Don't hit them again after that, unless they keep acting up. Usually after the smack, they'll jsut start to cry. Then be like "You wouldn't behave, now we're going home." This "time-out" stuff doesn't work. Kids need a little physical punishment, not a lot, just one good smack will usually do it. Of course, if you can learn the all-mighty art of emotional punishment, this works the best.
..........Zack.......... Developer Extraordinaire && Full Time Geek
"Don't go out of your way to step on people's toes, but don't stop walking all-together." GCS\P\SS d- s-:- a-- C++$ U--- P--- L- E- W++ N o K-? w+++ O++ !M-- V PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5+ X+ R++ tv++ b++ DI++ D+++ G+>G++++ e* h- r++ y+
-
Dang, I thought the Soapbox was for using smack*. :) * Street slang for heroin.
-
Dang, I thought the Soapbox was for using smack*. :) * Street slang for heroin.
Ed Gadziemski wrote: Dang, I thought the Soapbox was for using smack I think you're getting confused - the white lines between threads are cocaine, not heroin ;P -- Ian Darling
-
If a kid is acting like as ass, you need to give 'em a good smack. Kids don't really listen to reason. I mean, first you try telling them to calm down, but when that doesn't work, give 'em a good smack. Don't hit them again after that, unless they keep acting up. Usually after the smack, they'll jsut start to cry. Then be like "You wouldn't behave, now we're going home." This "time-out" stuff doesn't work. Kids need a little physical punishment, not a lot, just one good smack will usually do it. Of course, if you can learn the all-mighty art of emotional punishment, this works the best.
..........Zack.......... Developer Extraordinaire && Full Time Geek
"Don't go out of your way to step on people's toes, but don't stop walking all-together." GCS\P\SS d- s-:- a-- C++$ U--- P--- L- E- W++ N o K-? w+++ O++ !M-- V PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5+ X+ R++ tv++ b++ DI++ D+++ G+>G++++ e* h- r++ y+
This "time-out" stuff doesn't work. Kids need a little physical punishment, not a lot, just one good smack will usually do it. Of course, if you can learn the all-mighty art of emotional punishment, this works the best. I have 4 kids, ages 7 years and under. A combination of time out, reasoning, and spanking, tailored to the child in question, does the job. For example, my highly-social, 5 year old daughter does not respond to a spank but she dreads being grounded to her room for 15 minutes. Sean Winstead
-
I would venture to guess that most beatings are not premeditated. Most people that beat kids, don't plan it before hand.
boneheadIII wrote: I would venture to guess that most beatings are not premeditated. That's a very good point. I think that most 'beating' of children is a spur-of-the-moment reaction by parents that is driven by anger, fear, and/or frustration. NONE of these are valid reasons to hit a child. As was pointed out by the parent post, 'smacking' a child should be done in an attempt to drive home an important point that cannot be made to a child because of their lack of reasoning skills. It should never be used as a threat to a child. Personally, my parents smacked me on a number of occasions: - Wandering off into the street in front of our house - Wandering off in a crowded public place (the mall) - Lying about something I did - Stealing canding from a local store Looking back, I'm very glad that my parents did this. I was very young for all of these occasions, and a quick smack to the butt really let me know that I had crossed at line that was not to be crossed. I'm very glad that my parents forced me away from these behaviors even though I wasn't capable of really understanding why I should avoid them. -- Russell Morris "Have you gone mad Frink? Put down that science pole!"
-
This "time-out" stuff doesn't work. Kids need a little physical punishment, not a lot, just one good smack will usually do it. Of course, if you can learn the all-mighty art of emotional punishment, this works the best. I have 4 kids, ages 7 years and under. A combination of time out, reasoning, and spanking, tailored to the child in question, does the job. For example, my highly-social, 5 year old daughter does not respond to a spank but she dreads being grounded to her room for 15 minutes. Sean Winstead
Sean Winstead wrote: I have 4 kids, ages 7 years and under Woah! THAT sounds challenging :) I've got an 8 yr boy n 12 yr girl. With my 8 yr old, I can do any of those things to "get through". With my 12 yr old, well, NONE of it works. Spanking? Pf. Hurts for a few seconds. Reasoning? Pf. She knows better. Time out? Pf. Who cares. Wait till your 5 yr old grows up a little and finds out that being in her room is no biggie...:/ It just all depends on the kid I think. Some can learn the easy way. Some HAVE to try out the hard way. You do what you can, but at the end you just end up hoping they don't kill themselves while learning it the hard way... ...Steve