I'll throw in another data point from my personal experience. I have raised 2 kids, now adults. I didn't spank them, or even yell at them. My son was a successful student, and competitive athlete through high school and is in college now. My daughter was a successful student, graduated college with honors and is now running a special education program in a middle school. Neither of these kids were hit. They were well behaved, and didn't get in trouble with school, police, etc... I always spoke to them as human beings, discussed actions and consequences, used other forms of punishment (removal of privileges, grounding, etc...). I allowed them to discuss things with me (can't stand parents who won't let their kids "talk back" which can be a euphemism for having a rational discussion).
Granted, hitting kids does teach them lessons. It teaches them fear rather than respect. It teaches them that violence is the solution to problems. It teaches them to hit others to get their point across.
A parent who is unable to discuss behavior with kids lacks reason, logic, patience, compassion, judgement, and self-control. I also question their understanding of love ("I love them, and want the best for them, that's why I beat them" rings like a domestic abuser to me). But hitters tend to rationalize their behavior, so I expect stories of successful beatings of kids will follow.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
I'll throw in another data point from my personal experience. I have raised 2 kids, now adults. I didn't spank them, or even yell at them. My son was a successful student, and competitive athlete through high school and is in college now. My daughter was a successful student, graduated college with honors and is now running a special education program in a middle school. Neither of these kids were hit. They were well behaved, and didn't get in trouble with school, police, etc... I always spoke to them as human beings, discussed actions and consequences, used other forms of punishment (removal of privileges, grounding, etc...). I allowed them to discuss things with me (can't stand parents who won't let their kids "talk back" which can be a euphemism for having a rational discussion).
Granted, hitting kids does teach them lessons. It teaches them fear rather than respect. It teaches them that violence is the solution to problems. It teaches them to hit others to get their point across.
A parent who is unable to discuss behavior with kids lacks reason, logic, patience, compassion, judgement, and self-control. I also question their understanding of love ("I love them, and want the best for them, that's why I beat them" rings like a domestic abuser to me). But hitters tend to rationalize their behavior, so I expect stories of successful beatings of kids will follow.
I actually recall, after my last spanking, that I rebelled even further. it did nothing to teach me any lesson at all. all it did was make me hate my dad with a passion at the time. and it damaged the relationship at the time between my parents as well (my Mom was screaming at him while he was doing it). it was somewhat traumatic, in that I recall it to this day. it wasn't overly violent. just humiliating an unnecessary. in a twisted way I'm glad he did it, so I know without any doubt never to do that to my own kids.
Sometimes we tend to think of ourselves as heightened aliens- the type that have heads twice the size of our bodies and speak in digital tones.
As complex as human beings are, we are also very simple- especially as kids. If a kid associates playing on the highway with a swat on the ass... and they no longer play on the highway... good job parent! It's unrealistic to think 'every' child has the capacity to understand things they need to understand for their safety and the safety of others around them after a sit down discussion.
First attempts at curbing behavior should obviously be words, but in the event words fail... one may have to employ other methods.
let's say little seven bills unpaid gets a swat on the ass, and then you see him running in traffic again. what next?
The swat on the ass isn't the go-to move here. Remember, I'm not for 'spanking'. I'm only making the case for a swat on the ass given the appropriate set of circumstances. It's only a 'tool' that parents might use at critical moments failing everything else.
It was a serious wrestling match to keep my daughter from running off sidewalks into bust traffic. We had numerous chats with her and my wife and we consistently reminded each other to be ultra-watchful. So, I practised 'heightened supervision' until she recognized the inherent danger of playing in the street.
I guess my experience speaks to 'no spanking'; however, parenting is a really tough thing to do and my personal experience may not necessarily work for every situation. It's simply not my place to tell another parent how to raise their child when serious abuse is not the issue.
With that said, I feel the odd swat on the ass is not necessarily going to damage a kid. If the tactic results in the correct behaviour after numerous other tactics have failed... then fair enough. It's really individual and case specific. There are a number of items that are far more damaging to a young child than a swat on the butt, yet seem to be accepted more readily without as much scorn: parents constantly arguing with each other or parents in a messy divorce have a far more profound effect on a developing child than a swat served to remind them that what they are doing cannot be tolerated.
Oftenreading, for the most part I agree with what you say on a theoretical level, but in a practical sense I disagree. It wasn't a general sense of boundaries that kept me away from the road, it was the real consequence of a whoopin. Have you never been around any thick-skulled kids? I was all about pushing my limits within the physical world. When I saw a creek I had to determine if I could jump across it by trial. I wasn't content to climb the lowest branches of a tree, I had to try to peek my head out above the canopy. If I had the materials to do so, I would start fires to try to determine what things would burn, melt, or resist. Those are risky behaviors and talking just doesn't convey a sense of consequence to a strong willed child. I have known some childs that put themselves in serious danger routinely, despite the clear boundaries that their parents laid. That's when it's time for whuppin.
but when referencing these "thick skulled kids", a general smack on the bum that "hurts but doesn't harm", is going to do pretty much nothing anyway, so why bother? a kid isn't going to be afraid enough of a small smack on the butt to make them stop their risky and fun behaviour, is it? only a "whuppin" would, which you have said you are against.
also, as a general comment, those that have mentioned in this thread that they got their ass beat as a kid, seem to have a fairly harsh view of criminals and light sentences and social justice. a small pool to draw from, but an interesting coincidence, if a coincidence at all.
proof positive that violence begets violence.
Not really.
You have expressed that you were spanked as a child, yet those spankings confirmed to you that spanking was wrong and- more to what you were saying here- you have developed the disposition that sees criminals with a lighter view, while supporting lighter sentences and social justice.
So, a similar argument could be made that violence solves violence.
Oftenreading, for the most part I agree with what you say on a theoretical level, but in a practical sense I disagree. It wasn't a general sense of boundaries that kept me away from the road, it was the real consequence of a whoopin. Have you never been around any thick-skulled kids? I was all about pushing my limits within the physical world. When I saw a creek I had to determine if I could jump across it by trial. I wasn't content to climb the lowest branches of a tree, I had to try to peek my head out above the canopy. If I had the materials to do so, I would start fires to try to determine what things would burn, melt, or resist. Those are risky behaviors and talking just doesn't convey a sense of consequence to a strong willed child. I have known some childs that put themselves in serious danger routinely, despite the clear boundaries that their parents laid. That's when it's time for whuppin.
but when referencing these "thick skulled kids", a general smack on the bum that "hurts but doesn't harm", is going to do pretty much nothing anyway, so why bother? a kid isn't going to be afraid enough of a small smack on the butt to make them stop their risky and fun behaviour, is it? only a "whuppin" would, which you have said you are against.
also, as a general comment, those that have mentioned in this thread that they got their ass beat as a kid, seem to have a fairly harsh view of criminals and light sentences and social justice. a small pool to draw from, but an interesting coincidence, if a coincidence at all.
proof positive that violence begets violence.
Not really.
You have expressed that you were spanked as a child, yet those spankings confirmed to you that spanking was wrong and- more to what you were saying here- you have developed the disposition that sees criminals with a lighter view, while supporting lighter sentences and social justice.
So, a similar argument could be made that violence solves violence.
no. I was spanked a total of I think 3 times in a decade. I was referring to those who had mentioned they were "repeatedly whupped" as a kid.
Sometimes we tend to think of ourselves as heightened aliens- the type that have heads twice the size of our bodies and speak in digital tones.
As complex as human beings are, we are also very simple- especially as kids. If a kid associates playing on the highway with a swat on the ass... and they no longer play on the highway... good job parent! It's unrealistic to think 'every' child has the capacity to understand things they need to understand for their safety and the safety of others around them after a sit down discussion.
First attempts at curbing behavior should obviously be words, but in the event words fail... one may have to employ other methods.
let's say little seven bills unpaid gets a swat on the ass, and then you see him running in traffic again. what next?
The swat on the ass isn't the go-to move here. Remember, I'm not for 'spanking'. I'm only making the case for a swat on the ass given the appropriate set of circumstances. It's only a 'tool' that parents might use at critical moments failing everything else.
It was a serious wrestling match to keep my daughter from running off sidewalks into bust traffic. We had numerous chats with her and my wife and we consistently reminded each other to be ultra-watchful. So, I practised 'heightened supervision' until she recognized the inherent danger of playing in the street.
I guess my experience speaks to 'no spanking'; however, parenting is a really tough thing to do and my personal experience may not necessarily work for every situation. It's simply not my place to tell another parent how to raise their child when serious abuse is not the issue.
With that said, I feel the odd swat on the ass is not necessarily going to damage a kid. If the tactic results in the correct behaviour after numerous other tactics have failed... then fair enough. It's really individual and case specific. There are a number of items that are far more damaging to a young child than a swat on the butt, yet seem to be accepted more readily without as much scorn: parents constantly arguing with each other or parents in a messy divorce have a far more profound effect on a developing child than a swat served to remind them that what they are doing cannot be tolerated.
I can site the exact same example of my oldest daughter and her lack of awareness when it comes to walking into traffic. did I spank her? nope. I watched like a hawk (as you did yours) and have still not allowed her to go out on her own until she can prove that she can remember to be aware. she is 8. she knows that her friends this summer are going to want to head out on their own, and she knows that if she doesn't work on it, she will not be allowed to go unsupervised. so, she is improving, without physical "interference".
of course there are way more extreme examples of bad behaviour that would make it more difficult to deal with; of course. my nephew is one of them. and I've seen my sister swat him on the butt, and I still don't agree with it. it hasn't improved the behaviour. so what is really the point? I don't see kids altering their behaviours based on the threat of a beating; they merely do more to stop from getting caught, and/or they just become fearful before the punishment is administered.
I have also seen her inattention when it comes to him playing endless amounts of video games, watching tv, etc, so I agree with what someone said earlier; I think sometimes spanking can be a result of a bigger issue of lazy parenting. they let it get so far that they think the only thing that will shock the kid back to being good is a good smack. I say be a little more fucking involved and it won't have to come to that.
as a society it is absolutely our business to make sure that abuse does not happen in the home. it's a slippery slope from a little smack to an all out punch to the head, or to the kid becoming a bully, or whatever may be the result.
whether there are far more damaging things to do to a child is irrelevant. that's like someone saying, after being caught stealing, "well at least I didn't kill anyone". the lesser of many evils doesn't apply here.
Hypervigilance is great, and is the appropriate go to move at all times with children, but it isn't 100%. You aren't always around and you can't always be watching. Shouldn't we use all the tools in the box to keep our kids healthy and alive? Wouldn't everyone wish they had tried a swat on the bottom if they hadn't and their kid was involved in a tragedy?
Yeah, I got wacked with a wooden spoon on a semi-regular basis, and I'm pretty sure it did nothing to make me a better person.... of course, I'm positive that it did nothing to make me a worse person either. So I'm pretty neutral when it comes to spanking. Assuming we're talking about normal, appropriate spanking as opposed to beatings, I really don't care either way. Whatever the parents think is working.
As for the dad getting the sheriff to supervise... my first reaction was to think it's hilarious.
I doubt the kid feels like that though, lol.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Hypervigilance is great, and is the appropriate go to move at all times with children, but it isn't 100%. You aren't always around and you can't always be watching. Shouldn't we use all the tools in the box to keep our kids healthy and alive? Wouldn't everyone wish they had tried a swat on the bottom if they hadn't and their kid was involved in a tragedy?
again, I can't think of one time I would have stopped to think "my dad may hit me" if I do (insert risky behaviour here). our brains just don't work like that when deciding on risky behaviour. maybe we do if we decide to steal a cookie, but not when we have the adrenaline rush of playing human Frogger. the only thing that will work is repetitive teaching and making sure they understand what the possible consequences may be.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.[/quote]
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.[/quote]
fuck yea thirty bills, no abuse for us ever! [/quote]
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
Sometimes posting in AMT and listening to AMT responses look like this
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
I think what most needs to be measured is the love one is offering a child. To my way of thinking, this is the critical piece.
We can debate forever what is appropriate and what isn't, but I think we should save judgments in this department (the discipline one that is).
I bite my tongue when I watch my really young nephew disrespect his parents. I see multiple efforts try to dissuade this cool young guy's bad behavior... and all seem weak. Given the behavior hasn't as of yet changed and the child almost immediately resumes his poor disposition after a 'timeout' or 'chat'... it might be fair to say my brother and sister in law need a firmer hand. However, I'm not the parent and given the love I see, it's simply not my place to cast judgement or to try and tell them how to deal with it.
I can accept a softer approach just as much as I can accept a firmer hand when love is evident.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
I think what most needs to be measured is the love one is offering a child. To my way of thinking, this is the critical piece.
We can debate forever what is appropriate and what isn't, but I think we should save judgments in this department (the discipline one that is).
I bite my tongue when I watch my really young nephew disrespect his parents. I see multiple efforts try to dissuade this cool young guy's bad behavior... and all seem weak. Given the behavior hasn't as of yet changed and the child almost immediately resumes his poor disposition after a 'timeout' or 'chat'... it might be fair to say my brother and sister in law need a firmer hand. However, I'm not the parent and given the love I see, it's simply not my place to cast judgement or to try and tell them how to deal with it.
I can accept a softer approach just as much as I can accept a firmer hand when love is evident.
I couldn't agree with you more that the basis of parenting is a strong loving relationship with your child. Setting aside many of the issues already raised here, and not making any comment on your brother and sister-in-law's parenting, can we agree that it is possible to be absolutely firm in terms of what one will and will not accept from a child (particularly a young one who doesn't have the independent capacity to walk out the door), and the fortitude to follow through with limit setting if appropriate behaviour isn't present, without it having to involve violence? I have personally found it to be so, but you need to be able to be the one who doesn't blink, metaphorically speaking.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
Your definition of physical punishment has softened with each explanation. We go from an occasional spanking to something of a rare love tap while encouraging them to their room.
We were talking about spanking. Not what you described above. That being said, I still dont do either. I think its important for kids to learn from a very young age what type of physical contact is acceptable for them to give and recieve to/from others. If you would be upset at your kid doing it to someone else, or some kid doing it to your kid, or a teacher or other person of authority, then you shouldn't.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
I think what most needs to be measured is the love one is offering a child. To my way of thinking, this is the critical piece.
We can debate forever what is appropriate and what isn't, but I think we should save judgments in this department (the discipline one that is).
I bite my tongue when I watch my really young nephew disrespect his parents. I see multiple efforts try to dissuade this cool young guy's bad behavior... and all seem weak. Given the behavior hasn't as of yet changed and the child almost immediately resumes his poor disposition after a 'timeout' or 'chat'... it might be fair to say my brother and sister in law need a firmer hand. However, I'm not the parent and given the love I see, it's simply not my place to cast judgement or to try and tell them how to deal with it.
I can accept a softer approach just as much as I can accept a firmer hand when love is evident.
I couldn't agree with you more that the basis of parenting is a strong loving relationship with your child. Setting aside many of the issues already raised here, and not making any comment on your brother and sister-in-law's parenting, can we agree that it is possible to be absolutely firm in terms of what one will and will not accept from a child (particularly a young one who doesn't have the independent capacity to walk out the door), and the fortitude to follow through with limit setting if appropriate behaviour isn't present, without it having to involve violence? I have personally found it to be so, but you need to be able to be the one who doesn't blink, metaphorically speaking.
To some degree, yes. But here's the thing... not all people have the capacity to skillfully navigate a course of discipline without having the firm hand in their back pocket.
It's idealistic, but if we are honest with ourselves... unrealistic.
So do the skilled parents (such as yourself) who have managed to be able to spend much more time with their children and have the skill set to nurture in the most gentle fashion sneer at those that offer the same amount of love, yet parent differently than them and to the best of their abilities?
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
I think what most needs to be measured is the love one is offering a child. To my way of thinking, this is the critical piece.
We can debate forever what is appropriate and what isn't, but I think we should save judgments in this department (the discipline one that is).
I bite my tongue when I watch my really young nephew disrespect his parents. I see multiple efforts try to dissuade this cool young guy's bad behavior... and all seem weak. Given the behavior hasn't as of yet changed and the child almost immediately resumes his poor disposition after a 'timeout' or 'chat'... it might be fair to say my brother and sister in law need a firmer hand. However, I'm not the parent and given the love I see, it's simply not my place to cast judgement or to try and tell them how to deal with it.
I can accept a softer approach just as much as I can accept a firmer hand when love is evident.
Seriously, that last statement could easily be a battered wfie in denial talking. And that is not being overdramatic; that is exactly the shit they say to themselves to justify getting hit. "He loves me, so it must have been my fault". the last thing i want to teach my daughters is that being hit is ok as long as i still show them affection. What kind of message does that send?
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
Your definition of physical punishment has softened with each explanation. We go from an occasional spanking to something of a rare love tap while encouraging them to their room.
We were talking about spanking. Not what you described above. That being said, I still dont do either. I think its important for kids to learn from a very young age what type of physical contact is acceptable for them to give and recieve to/from others. If you would be upset at your kid doing it to someone else, or some kid doing it to your kid, or a teacher or other person of authority, then you shouldn't.
I hope we are not going to do this again.
I have said my parents used to spank me a lot. I have consistently said I'm not an advocate, but I understand it.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
This makes sense to me - the (personal?) definitions of abuse.
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
I think what most needs to be measured is the love one is offering a child. To my way of thinking, this is the critical piece.
We can debate forever what is appropriate and what isn't, but I think we should save judgments in this department (the discipline one that is).
I bite my tongue when I watch my really young nephew disrespect his parents. I see multiple efforts try to dissuade this cool young guy's bad behavior... and all seem weak. Given the behavior hasn't as of yet changed and the child almost immediately resumes his poor disposition after a 'timeout' or 'chat'... it might be fair to say my brother and sister in law need a firmer hand. However, I'm not the parent and given the love I see, it's simply not my place to cast judgement or to try and tell them how to deal with it.
I can accept a softer approach just as much as I can accept a firmer hand when love is evident.
Seriously, that last statement could easily be a battered wfie in denial talking. And that is not being overdramatic; that is exactly the shit they say to themselves to justify getting hit. "He loves me, so it must have been my fault". the last thing i want to teach my daughters is that being hit is ok as long as i still show them affection. What kind of message does that send?
Hardly.
One is an adult striking another adult. The other is an adult correcting a child.
You know... you really need to consider your approach on this forum. In our previous little spat... you sneered at my comment where I alluded to the authoritative approach you flaunted based on your life experiences. In this thread that you created... As soon as someone offered a different perpsective than yours... You say, "as a 40 year old father, I'm pretty sure I'm a little more qualified knowing what lessons I learned than someone on the internet. But thanks."
You flaunted your opinion based on your personal beliefs and experiences... again.
Maybe you do have things figured out in such a way that you can speak so incredulously towards others. If so, please excuse my simple way.
Sometimes we tend to think of ourselves as heightened aliens- the type that have heads twice the size of our bodies and speak in digital tones.
As complex as human beings are, we are also very simple- especially as kids. If a kid associates playing on the highway with a swat on the ass... and they no longer play on the highway... good job parent! It's unrealistic to think 'every' child has the capacity to understand things they need to understand for their safety and the safety of others around them after a sit down discussion.
First attempts at curbing behavior should obviously be words, but in the event words fail... one may have to employ other methods.
let's say little seven bills unpaid gets a swat on the ass, and then you see him running in traffic again. what next?
The swat on the ass isn't the go-to move here. Remember, I'm not for 'spanking'. I'm only making the case for a swat on the ass given the appropriate set of circumstances. It's only a 'tool' that parents might use at critical moments failing everything else.
It was a serious wrestling match to keep my daughter from running off sidewalks into bust traffic. We had numerous chats with her and my wife and we consistently reminded each other to be ultra-watchful. So, I practised 'heightened supervision' until she recognized the inherent danger of playing in the street.
I guess my experience speaks to 'no spanking'; however, parenting is a really tough thing to do and my personal experience may not necessarily work for every situation. It's simply not my place to tell another parent how to raise their child when serious abuse is not the issue.
With that said, I feel the odd swat on the ass is not necessarily going to damage a kid. If the tactic results in the correct behaviour after numerous other tactics have failed... then fair enough. It's really individual and case specific. There are a number of items that are far more damaging to a young child than a swat on the butt, yet seem to be accepted more readily without as much scorn: parents constantly arguing with each other or parents in a messy divorce have a far more profound effect on a developing child than a swat served to remind them that what they are doing cannot be tolerated.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
Your definition of physical punishment has softened with each explanation. We go from an occasional spanking to something of a rare love tap while encouraging them to their room.
We were talking about spanking. Not what you described above. That being said, I still dont do either. I think its important for kids to learn from a very young age what type of physical contact is acceptable for them to give and recieve to/from others. If you would be upset at your kid doing it to someone else, or some kid doing it to your kid, or a teacher or other person of authority, then you shouldn't.
I hope we are not going to do this again.
I have said my parents used to spank me a lot. I have consistently said I'm not an advocate, but I understand it.
Not sure what you are getting at here....I know your position. thats not the point I was making.
You never answered my question from a while back; you deflected it based on a technicality. I shall ask again without specifics: if the spanking/swatting fails to correct the undesired behaviour, what is next?
There's a huge different between a single slap and a beating with a wooden paddle in front of a grown man who is most likely a stranger.
That's not just physical abuse, it's psychological.
Further, if I'm understanding this correctly, he called the sheriff to "supervise" because the girl told him it's illegal for parents to spank their kids. What's he's unintentionally teaching her is that the laws she thinks are in place to protect her are in fact a weapon to be used against her. God help that girl if she ever gets assaulted (and don't jump down my throat about that statement - statistically she's got a 1 in 4 chance of being sexually assaulted in her lifetime.)
It's so sad. Can you imagine being that child having to sit and wait for this guy to show up so her dad can paddle her in front of him? I mean what the hell
Sometimes we tend to think of ourselves as heightened aliens- the type that have heads twice the size of our bodies and speak in digital tones.
As complex as human beings are, we are also very simple- especially as kids. If a kid associates playing on the highway with a swat on the ass... and they no longer play on the highway... good job parent! It's unrealistic to think 'every' child has the capacity to understand things they need to understand for their safety and the safety of others around them after a sit down discussion.
First attempts at curbing behavior should obviously be words, but in the event words fail... one may have to employ other methods.
let's say little seven bills unpaid gets a swat on the ass, and then you see him running in traffic again. what next?
The swat on the ass isn't the go-to move here. Remember, I'm not for 'spanking'. I'm only making the case for a swat on the ass given the appropriate set of circumstances. It's only a 'tool' that parents might use at critical moments failing everything else.
It was a serious wrestling match to keep my daughter from running off sidewalks into bust traffic. We had numerous chats with her and my wife and we consistently reminded each other to be ultra-watchful. So, I practised 'heightened supervision' until she recognized the inherent danger of playing in the street.
I guess my experience speaks to 'no spanking'; however, parenting is a really tough thing to do and my personal experience may not necessarily work for every situation. It's simply not my place to tell another parent how to raise their child when serious abuse is not the issue.
With that said, I feel the odd swat on the ass is not necessarily going to damage a kid. If the tactic results in the correct behaviour after numerous other tactics have failed... then fair enough. It's really individual and case specific. There are a number of items that are far more damaging to a young child than a swat on the butt, yet seem to be accepted more readily without as much scorn: parents constantly arguing with each other or parents in a messy divorce have a far more profound effect on a developing child than a swat served to remind them that what they are doing cannot be tolerated.
I don't think it's so much of a 'Gee, I better not because my father will hit me' as much as it is an accentuation of the significance of the undesirable behavior- 'This behavior is particularly poor' compared to other behaviors that simply warrant a timeout or a talk.
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
Your definition of physical punishment has softened with each explanation. We go from an occasional spanking to something of a rare love tap while encouraging them to their room.
We were talking about spanking. Not what you described above. That being said, I still dont do either. I think its important for kids to learn from a very young age what type of physical contact is acceptable for them to give and recieve to/from others. If you would be upset at your kid doing it to someone else, or some kid doing it to your kid, or a teacher or other person of authority, then you shouldn't.
I hope we are not going to do this again.
I have said my parents used to spank me a lot. I have consistently said I'm not an advocate, but I understand it.
Not sure what you are getting at here....I know your position. thats not the point I was making.
You never answered my question from a while back; you deflected it based on a technicality. I shall ask again without specifics: if the spanking/swatting fails to correct the undesired behaviour, what is next?
You got me. Seclusion? I don't know. This is the whole premise from which I speak from- there is no manual or blue print that is perfect. Every situation is unique to its own. The answers are hard to find sometimes and the challenges can be great.
The technicality you speak of was me clarifying that physical contact was the last effort made by the parent (it should never be the first recourse). In other words, all other interventions had been employed and a parent had nothing else at their disposal. Hence, the sincere 'I don't know'.
Hugh, I feel as if I did or said something to turn you against me. I know we are opposing each other on various items lately, but please remember that it is only your viewpoint I am opposed to and not you. And even when I am opposed to your viewpoint, I still respect it even though it might not seem like it.
Geez, I even contested your (tongue in cheek) Courtney Love suggestion in the best female performer thread. If you ever have seen her Jeremy cover... you'd understand why.
let me check the calendar..hey,.,.its ok.spanking is allowed its 8th january 1952!!!
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
I agree thirtybills, the tone from some in here is incredibly judgemental. There are clearly some perfect parents here who have it all figured out and distilled into a simple black and white scenario. Hugh, your repeated allusions to battered women IS being overdramatic, and using a false equivalency to prop your drama up.
Comments
Granted, hitting kids does teach them lessons. It teaches them fear rather than respect. It teaches them that violence is the solution to problems. It teaches them to hit others to get their point across.
A parent who is unable to discuss behavior with kids lacks reason, logic, patience, compassion, judgement, and self-control. I also question their understanding of love ("I love them, and want the best for them, that's why I beat them" rings like a domestic abuser to me). But hitters tend to rationalize their behavior, so I expect stories of successful beatings of kids will follow.
=D>
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
The swat on the ass isn't the go-to move here. Remember, I'm not for 'spanking'. I'm only making the case for a swat on the ass given the appropriate set of circumstances. It's only a 'tool' that parents might use at critical moments failing everything else.
It was a serious wrestling match to keep my daughter from running off sidewalks into bust traffic. We had numerous chats with her and my wife and we consistently reminded each other to be ultra-watchful. So, I practised 'heightened supervision' until she recognized the inherent danger of playing in the street.
I guess my experience speaks to 'no spanking'; however, parenting is a really tough thing to do and my personal experience may not necessarily work for every situation. It's simply not my place to tell another parent how to raise their child when serious abuse is not the issue.
With that said, I feel the odd swat on the ass is not necessarily going to damage a kid. If the tactic results in the correct behaviour after numerous other tactics have failed... then fair enough. It's really individual and case specific. There are a number of items that are far more damaging to a young child than a swat on the butt, yet seem to be accepted more readily without as much scorn: parents constantly arguing with each other or parents in a messy divorce have a far more profound effect on a developing child than a swat served to remind them that what they are doing cannot be tolerated.
Not really.
You have expressed that you were spanked as a child, yet those spankings confirmed to you that spanking was wrong and- more to what you were saying here- you have developed the disposition that sees criminals with a lighter view, while supporting lighter sentences and social justice.
So, a similar argument could be made that violence solves violence.
no. I was spanked a total of I think 3 times in a decade. I was referring to those who had mentioned they were "repeatedly whupped" as a kid.
www.headstonesband.com
I can site the exact same example of my oldest daughter and her lack of awareness when it comes to walking into traffic. did I spank her? nope. I watched like a hawk (as you did yours) and have still not allowed her to go out on her own until she can prove that she can remember to be aware. she is 8. she knows that her friends this summer are going to want to head out on their own, and she knows that if she doesn't work on it, she will not be allowed to go unsupervised. so, she is improving, without physical "interference".
of course there are way more extreme examples of bad behaviour that would make it more difficult to deal with; of course. my nephew is one of them. and I've seen my sister swat him on the butt, and I still don't agree with it. it hasn't improved the behaviour. so what is really the point? I don't see kids altering their behaviours based on the threat of a beating; they merely do more to stop from getting caught, and/or they just become fearful before the punishment is administered.
I have also seen her inattention when it comes to him playing endless amounts of video games, watching tv, etc, so I agree with what someone said earlier; I think sometimes spanking can be a result of a bigger issue of lazy parenting. they let it get so far that they think the only thing that will shock the kid back to being good is a good smack. I say be a little more fucking involved and it won't have to come to that.
as a society it is absolutely our business to make sure that abuse does not happen in the home. it's a slippery slope from a little smack to an all out punch to the head, or to the kid becoming a bully, or whatever may be the result.
whether there are far more damaging things to do to a child is irrelevant. that's like someone saying, after being caught stealing, "well at least I didn't kill anyone". the lesser of many evils doesn't apply here.
www.headstonesband.com
As for the dad getting the sheriff to supervise... my first reaction was to think it's hilarious.
I doubt the kid feels like that though, lol.
again, I can't think of one time I would have stopped to think "my dad may hit me" if I do (insert risky behaviour here). our brains just don't work like that when deciding on risky behaviour. maybe we do if we decide to steal a cookie, but not when we have the adrenaline rush of playing human Frogger. the only thing that will work is repetitive teaching and making sure they understand what the possible consequences may be.
www.headstonesband.com
I can also remember vividly how often words were lost on me and never had any influence on curbing behaviors that needed to be addressed. I'd nod my head and say the right things, but it was business as usual until Dad threatened corporal punishment or exerted it- I'd respond then. So, Hugh, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while spanking never did anything positive for you... it does for some others.
As parents set about performing the most challenging thing they'll be faced with in their lifetime (raising children), for some situations, giving a kid a swat on the butt might be reasonable despite being undesirable or distasteful at the same time.
There is no 'one way' to raise a child.
Sure there is: no abuse. To me it is as black and white as that.
www.headstonesband.com
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.[/quote]
fuck yea thirty bills, no abuse for us ever!
Not so sure it's black and white, Hugh...at least from here.
Also noting the need to let anger subside beforehand, as gambs mentioned.
(for some reason, I find it difficult to properly articulate my thoughts on this subject)
Abuse most certainly doesn't fit within the perameters of appropriate child rearing practices. To this we can agree.
What we might not agree on is what constitutes abuse. I just don't see a swat on the butt ushering a kid to their room on a rare instance as abuse.[/quote]
fuck yea thirty bills, no abuse for us ever!
Hahaha!
This picture has worked twice now!
Sometimes posting in AMT and listening to AMT responses look like this
I think what most needs to be measured is the love one is offering a child. To my way of thinking, this is the critical piece.
We can debate forever what is appropriate and what isn't, but I think we should save judgments in this department (the discipline one that is).
I bite my tongue when I watch my really young nephew disrespect his parents. I see multiple efforts try to dissuade this cool young guy's bad behavior... and all seem weak. Given the behavior hasn't as of yet changed and the child almost immediately resumes his poor disposition after a 'timeout' or 'chat'... it might be fair to say my brother and sister in law need a firmer hand. However, I'm not the parent and given the love I see, it's simply not my place to cast judgement or to try and tell them how to deal with it.
I can accept a softer approach just as much as I can accept a firmer hand when love is evident.
Your definition of physical punishment has softened with each explanation. We go from an occasional spanking to something of a rare love tap while encouraging them to their room.
We were talking about spanking. Not what you described above. That being said, I still dont do either. I think its important for kids to learn from a very young age what type of physical contact is acceptable for them to give and recieve to/from others. If you would be upset at your kid doing it to someone else, or some kid doing it to your kid, or a teacher or other person of authority, then you shouldn't.
www.headstonesband.com
To some degree, yes. But here's the thing... not all people have the capacity to skillfully navigate a course of discipline without having the firm hand in their back pocket.
It's idealistic, but if we are honest with ourselves... unrealistic.
So do the skilled parents (such as yourself) who have managed to be able to spend much more time with their children and have the skill set to nurture in the most gentle fashion sneer at those that offer the same amount of love, yet parent differently than them and to the best of their abilities?
Seriously, that last statement could easily be a battered wfie in denial talking. And that is not being overdramatic; that is exactly the shit they say to themselves to justify getting hit. "He loves me, so it must have been my fault". the last thing i want to teach my daughters is that being hit is ok as long as i still show them affection. What kind of message does that send?
www.headstonesband.com
I hope we are not going to do this again.
I have said my parents used to spank me a lot. I have consistently said I'm not an advocate, but I understand it.
Hardly.
One is an adult striking another adult. The other is an adult correcting a child.
You know... you really need to consider your approach on this forum. In our previous little spat... you sneered at my comment where I alluded to the authoritative approach you flaunted based on your life experiences. In this thread that you created... As soon as someone offered a different perpsective than yours... You say, "as a 40 year old father, I'm pretty sure I'm a little more qualified knowing what lessons I learned than someone on the internet. But thanks."
You flaunted your opinion based on your personal beliefs and experiences... again.
Maybe you do have things figured out in such a way that you can speak so incredulously towards others. If so, please excuse my simple way.
Not sure what you are getting at here....I know your position. thats not the point I was making.
You never answered my question from a while back; you deflected it based on a technicality. I shall ask again without specifics: if the spanking/swatting fails to correct the undesired behaviour, what is next?
www.headstonesband.com
That's not just physical abuse, it's psychological.
Further, if I'm understanding this correctly, he called the sheriff to "supervise" because the girl told him it's illegal for parents to spank their kids. What's he's unintentionally teaching her is that the laws she thinks are in place to protect her are in fact a weapon to be used against her. God help that girl if she ever gets assaulted (and don't jump down my throat about that statement - statistically she's got a 1 in 4 chance of being sexually assaulted in her lifetime.)
It's so sad. Can you imagine being that child having to sit and wait for this guy to show up so her dad can paddle her in front of him? I mean what the hell
LIVEFOOTSTEPS.ORG/USER/?USR=435
You got me. Seclusion? I don't know. This is the whole premise from which I speak from- there is no manual or blue print that is perfect. Every situation is unique to its own. The answers are hard to find sometimes and the challenges can be great.
The technicality you speak of was me clarifying that physical contact was the last effort made by the parent (it should never be the first recourse). In other words, all other interventions had been employed and a parent had nothing else at their disposal. Hence, the sincere 'I don't know'.
Hugh, I feel as if I did or said something to turn you against me. I know we are opposing each other on various items lately, but please remember that it is only your viewpoint I am opposed to and not you. And even when I am opposed to your viewpoint, I still respect it even though it might not seem like it.
Geez, I even contested your (tongue in cheek) Courtney Love suggestion in the best female performer thread. If you ever have seen her Jeremy cover... you'd understand why.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Hugh, your repeated allusions to battered women IS being overdramatic, and using a false equivalency to prop your drama up.