Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Locked up for smacking my son
dailymail.co.uk — How a slap brought police and social services in to tear a family apart...
adrian67- 1818 diggs
- digg it
- Whoopteedoo, on 04/07/2008, -19/+152This is incredible. What has happened to your country?
- galeninjapan, on 04/07/2008, -43/+69Socialism happened.
- FizixMan, on 04/07/2008, -27/+21I suppose you'd prefer a privately owned child welfare services agency that made profit by making sure as many children were taken away from their savagely abusive parents as possible.
- bradsh, on 04/07/2008, -9/+23private companies obviously wouldnt be able to do this by nature of them being private.
- MWeather, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3Yeah, just like Blackwater wouldn't have the power to take citizens' guns.
- galeninjapan, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1Blackwater couldn't do ***** unless they were given the power by our government.
- Wesside, on 04/07/2008, -18/+7@bradsh you're either being sarcastic or your a complete idiot.
- galeninjapan, on 04/07/2008, -4/+18These private entities are called families and you better believe I wish they have more control than the government.
- MWeather, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4So If I beat my kids unconscious, I'm the one who gets to decide if it's child abuse? Do you really think that's the best solution?
- galeninjapan, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2No, thats called assault and is dealt with in a different manner.
- MWeather, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3So who decides beating is assault but not slapping, if not the government?
- galeninjapan, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Preferably this system we have called a trial by jury. It's kind of out fashion these days, but I like it.
- MWeather, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2And until the trial is over, the kid stays with me for more beatings?
- galeninjapan, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1When you are accused of a crime are you innocent until proven guilty?
- bradsh, on 04/07/2008, -9/+23private companies obviously wouldnt be able to do this by nature of them being private.
- Wesside, on 04/07/2008, -33/+27Socialism isn't the problem here you ***** idiot.
- lonedust, on 04/07/2008, -6/+28You don't have to be so rude.
I do agree the problem is not socialism. It's simple bureaucracy and dimwits hiding behind "policies" instead of using common sense to make decisions.- galeninjapan, on 04/07/2008, -23/+12This is what socialism brings. Bureaucracy and retards running things.
- dagnome1984, on 04/07/2008, -4/+15Indeed the whole premise behind socialism is the use of more government control in order to get an intended result. People can't seem to grasp that it breeds bureaucracy by it's very nature in order to instill more control.
- WoollyMittens, on 04/07/2008, -3/+9Corporatism doesn't seem to work very well either.
- LordFuxxles, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3I think he meant fascism.
- SammyJr, on 04/07/2008, -1/+7@dagnome1984, socialism is government ownership of industry. It has nothing to do with social control of people. If that were the case, then the Religious Right would be socialists.
- MWeather, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4If the religious right were real Christians, they would be socialists just like Jesus was.
- norman619, on 04/07/2008, -11/+13It sure as hell is. You give your government WAY too much control,
- Kerrigore, on 04/07/2008, -4/+22The thing is, you have no real basis for that judgement. How many cases are there like this compared to cases where children are saved from abusive homes? Of course the media is going to sensationalize cases like this, where as "Child saved from abusive homes by social service workers doing their job" probably won't even make the news.
The problem here was the children making false allegations. I believe the agency acted correctly insofar as the children were removed from the home until an assessment could be made as to the veracity of said claims. If this wasn't the policy, we could all be equally as morally outraged while hearing a story of how children were kept in an abusive home despite them informing social services of the abuse, and people would be saying the social services people should be fired for not following up and removing the children immediately, and so on.
Obviously it's easy in retrospect and from the perspective of the parents to see that there was no abuse and to demonize the social services, but how the hell were they to know? It's not like abusive parents wouldn't equally deny the charges. - netant, on 04/07/2008, -6/+2@Kerrigore
Who cares how many kids are "saved" if the government is going to spend its energies harrassing families from PROPERLY raising their kids? Don't you realize government cannot possibly replace the function of parents, without devastating society? The last time stupidity like that was in vogue was Sparta, Greece.
All it takes for the gov't to destroy the career of a person, disrupt the functioning of a family FOR OVER A YEAR, and drain the finances of the parents, are UNSUBSTANTIATED lies of kids. I'd rather have kids being abused without society lifting a finger, than have gov't destroy families because they have to follow procedures. You can isolate and manage troublesome individuals, you can't isolate and manage government. - eir574, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2@netant,
Yes, the government can't possibly replace the function of parents. But, how many times have we seen stories in the news where some child has died and we find out that social services was notified, but either didn't act or didn't go far enough to save the child from abusive parents?
I don't want to see the government destroy families, and I do want to see more done to prevent social services from making people's lives hell based on unsubstantiated allegations. However, unlike you, I don't think that we should go so far as to allow kids to be abused without interference from social services in order to achieve that goal. - Kerrigore, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Netant: "Who cares how many kids are "saved"
Although I did read the rest of your comment, it was only to realize that I might as well have stopped reading after the opening line, where you most clearly articulated your attitude. - CaptEnder, on 04/08/2008, -0/+1@Kerrigore
"How many cases are there like this compared to cases where children are saved from abusive homes?" Are you implying that the number of children saved is greater than a single family ruined and it is therefore okay to have ruined the one family? Would this translate to the death penalty also, i.e. it's okay if an innocent person is put to death because of all the guilty people who were taken off the street? While I agree protecting children should be a priority for all people, the agencies involved seem to be overly aggressive in the wrong cases. I think this is the thrust of the article and parent comment. - netant, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1@Kerrigore
Your problem, not mine. On one hand, I'm happy I could quickly select a set of opening words that could express my attitude. On the other hand, I could have wasted 10x more time trying to craft a propagandistic approach to "manipulate" you into agreeing with my position. Sorry dude, I'm not Hillary Clinton.
Apparently, you're one of those precious, caring people that would slaughter a million Iraqi civilians to bring them "freedom" and democracy, as long as its a democratic gov't you find acceptable. Which is my freaking point. A gov't chartered to interfere with the function of every family in the country is worse than a gov't that lets kids die from violent abuse from the parent. Kids are not so precious that its worth crippling a nation of them in order to protect a minority of them from abuse. Evil always exists in the world; putting in a less evil response to it, in order to feel more smug, is not a solution. Gov't should only be tasked with problems it can fix.
Your problem is that instead of attacking the "flaws" you perceive in my position, you prefer to pretend they are irrelevant. - Kerrigore, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1@CaptEnder: No, I want to protect innocent children just like I oppose the death penalty because it threatens innocents. I do not think their family was "ruined" in this case. There were obviously serious problems before this event occurred, for the children to make the false allegations they did. What's the alternative; to just ignore all allegations of abuse by children, because god forbid they be temporarily removed from the home while an assessment is made?
@netant: I have no idea how you got from supporting social services to slaughtering Iraqi civilians in the name of democracy. As for addressing your position, as I said, I don't think I need to. Clearly, you don't care about children getting abused (or rather, you are wiling to sacrifice them on your ideal of liberty and freedom from government oversight), while I am not.
- Kerrigore, on 04/07/2008, -4/+22The thing is, you have no real basis for that judgement. How many cases are there like this compared to cases where children are saved from abusive homes? Of course the media is going to sensationalize cases like this, where as "Child saved from abusive homes by social service workers doing their job" probably won't even make the news.
- netant, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1@eir574
The choices presented is either the status quo, which is for the gov't to damage families to protect a minority of kids who will be screwed up anyway, or an alternative. The problem is that people, including yourself, do not demonstrate the outrage necessary to effect change. How do you codify a procedure that boils down to "run smarter"? You can't. What you can do is put in a guideline that will result in more kids falling through the cracks. And that is the answer! You have to accept the fact that being LESS zealous will result in more abuse cases. It takes an HONEST and rational person to realize that gov't can't fix everything, and you accept an increase of a kid "not being saved" per year, because the ALTERNATIVE is worse.
E.G. - I, for one, am WILDLY in favor of abolishing "no fly lists". I see that they cannot prevent terrorism, and only make flying hell. They exist because the voting public are too RETARDED to realize that, and only care that the gov't DO SOMETHING, without realizing it only HARMS them. The problem is that people like you find it more important that people THINK you're a nice guy, than to actually be a morally courageous person.
- lonedust, on 04/07/2008, -6/+28You don't have to be so rude.
- whiskeyklone, on 04/07/2008, -9/+17Britian hasn't been socialist since the late 70s... Why does the term 'social worker' confuse Americans so much?
- TopBanana, on 04/07/2008, -7/+7Rubbish. It's being run by a load of ex communist party members.
- Pixelante, on 04/07/2008, -9/+6Britain is the Safe Society. They're so committed to your well-being that they will jail you, beat you, shoot you and drop you dying into a heap of horse manure in order to keep you "safe".
Hail Britain, the land of the CCTV, where your head is baton-fodder.- Amric, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Sounds pretty much like another country I have heard about...
- LordFuxxles, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2Right, except there are no guns to shoot you with and no police beatings. So I guess, that does make it the safe society as you call it.
- MWeather, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1I must be imagining the people getting shot for their cellphones and iPods, and the police murdering an innocent Brazilian on the tube.
You brits need to realize safety and freedom are incompatible. - cawpin, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2"are no guns to shoot you with "
Right, you keep living in that fantasy. - ThndrShk2k, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Thats the problem, if there are no guns to shoot you with, what happens when someone DOES get a gun?
If the police are the only ones who have such guns, then that would also be a greater power gap between the people and the civil servants, providing more room for abuse of power.
Just because someone could shoot someone else with a gun is not a reason to make it so the only ones who can own the object that does the shooting are the ones who protect people. Just because people say that allowing people to have guns freely causes people to get shot, doesn't mean there isn't the same, or worse, consequences of the latter option of severely limiting people's ownership of guns.
It may appear safe, but in reality it's more susceptible to corruption and unbalance of power and liberties. This unbalance can potentially make more people suffer if a rogue entity gets a hold of an item that is deemed 'unsafe' by the powers that be, causing more casualties in a shootout for instance.
- FizixMan, on 04/07/2008, -27/+21I suppose you'd prefer a privately owned child welfare services agency that made profit by making sure as many children were taken away from their savagely abusive parents as possible.
- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -75/+6At first I read that as "our country" and was going to digg you down for being an idiot, since you live in the US and this happened in the UK.
Then I realized there was a "Y" in there, so I dugg you down for being an idiot, since you're a ***** idiot.- gregoryan, on 04/07/2008, -2/+36and i suppose you're the genius. who can't read.
- acitcratnA, on 04/07/2008, -1/+23I did not have to think twice about anything; I just buried you.
- ronjohn, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1my sentiments exactly not U.S.
- antiorblkflag9, on 04/07/2008, -2/+10Good ***** question
- bluechips23, on 04/07/2008, -8/+49I know exactly what happened. Its called "wussism". People are being conditioned now these days to grow up to be a wuss and nothing else.
- norman619, on 04/07/2008, -11/+25This is happening here in the US as well. I call it the pussification of our generation.
- BrainInAJar, on 04/07/2008, -24/+7any time i hear the word 'wuss' or someone referred to as a 'pussy', all i can think about is grease stained shirted cheap beer swilling rednecks. The sooner that crap's bred out of the human race, the better. Monkeys beat each other and throw *****, humans ought to be better than that.
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -4/+8Holding humanity in that sort of light is part of the problem.
- MikeSD34, on 04/07/2008, -5/+16Children aren't 'evolved', like any other young animal they are ignorant of the world around them. It's their nature to be curious, and to push the boundaries. The purpose of this is to learn where the boundaries actually are. The problem is that they will keep pushing until you push back, and these days, it's supposedly wrong to push back using any sort of physical force. Children adapt, and the typical punishments have less and less meaning because as soon as they're over, that's it. There's no long lasting effect. A swift smack in the rear hurts long after it's done, and soon, even the threat of that is enough to make one think twice.
- travis1982, on 04/07/2008, -5/+9pussy
- dk911, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Dude, I know more "rednecks" who've broken more bones than you have doing that ***** that you call "pussification". At least their parents let them learn by trying rather than protecting them from making mistakes. Take your liberal, pussified ass into any bar and call someone a redneck and I bet you get your ass beat for the first time in your life -- pussy.
- ronjohn, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2i WAS torn between digging you down or giving you digg for the pussification comment. I gave you a digg. However This is not in the U.S. and parents hit there kids in the U.S. all the time!
- dk911, on 04/07/2008, -2/+4I agree with you one hundred percent... Our nation is all about making kids into pussies. Every kid has to win, no one is a loser. Can't have kids that know what it's like to fight for what they believe in because it might hurt their feelings. I'm sick of this ***** and it's about time it stopped. I plan to raise my children with spanks just like I received for doing things that are inappropriate. I will let them skin their knees when they fall off their bike and tell them to get back up and try it again. And if my kid loses at soccer, I won't shower him with praise and mend his fragile ego, I will let him know that a loss is a great reason to try harder and win the next time around.
Why do we allow our children to be such pussies? For some reason, some clod thought that spanking was abuse at some point. I understand when someone is constantly letting their rage flow into some child's backside via their palm -- that is abuse. It usually develops into more serious offenses... But, c'mon -- a quick smack to the butt for being insolent is a good thing. I had to endure it and so did every generation before me. It made us think before we acted.
Kids walk around these days thinking they rule the nest, and it's high time that they learned that they do NOT.- netant, on 04/09/2008, -0/+11) Academics and non-academics make money proclaiming there is a problem, and proclaiming a solution: Buy my book, and do what it says.
2) The media, which makes it money by bringing attention to crap, brings their crap to the TV/radio/magazines. They, perhaps rightly so, do not editorialize or challenge the "new-agey-flavor-of-the-month".
3) The idiots buy it hook, line, and sinker, and then pester their equally stupid politicians to make it law.
4) People are idiots or morally weak. They are incapable of critical thinking, or asserting an unpopular perspective.
Here is the ugly truth: crappy children are coming of age because of crappy parents. I, for one, would NEVER try to be a "pal" to my child. Its your job to be their PARENT. By its very nature, its a hierarchical relationship. Its most important that they RESPECT me, not LIKE me. Let them "like" Mommy more. If they do something wrong, you let them know. If they ignore you, you HURT them. If you're one of these braniacs who think you can establish punishment without hitting them, fine, but you make sure you get your point across.
Nowhere is this more evident than at a restaurant. Little kids shouting and horsing around is a sure sign of crappy parenting. Perhaps its not possible at a point in time to get a toddler to behave properly in a restaurant. Fine. DON'T BRING THEM. You are NOT ENTITLED to ruin other diner's meal with your SQEALING children. There is no excuse, only a crappy parent.
And I tell you something. Its crappy AMERICAN parents that are doing this. I remember going to a restaurant, and there was a white family gathering, and another table with an immigrant couple and their three year old kid. There was a 2 year old harpy from hell, and the parents did NOTHING to correct this kid. Finally, we overheard the immigrant kid asking his parent "What's wrong with her"? Later on, he gestured to the table and said "SHUT UP". It was hilarious, and I had to suppress the urge to walk over and give the kid a hug.
- netant, on 04/09/2008, -0/+11) Academics and non-academics make money proclaiming there is a problem, and proclaiming a solution: Buy my book, and do what it says.
- BrainInAJar, on 04/07/2008, -24/+7any time i hear the word 'wuss' or someone referred to as a 'pussy', all i can think about is grease stained shirted cheap beer swilling rednecks. The sooner that crap's bred out of the human race, the better. Monkeys beat each other and throw *****, humans ought to be better than that.
- Spuy767, on 04/07/2008, -3/+3Utter pusification. Over the last 20 years, in the interest of making the lower half feel more included, the governments, not of any single nation, but of the world, have worked towards equality, not via a hand up for the less fortunate, but via an oppressive palm forcing the most well equipped of us toward a median state of mediocrity.
- norman619, on 04/07/2008, -11/+25This is happening here in the US as well. I call it the pussification of our generation.
- MaTT2011, on 04/07/2008, -5/+36Do you really think this doesn't happen in America? HA!
- BGog, on 04/07/2008, -0/+5This EXACT thing happens in America all the time. I'd be all outraged if it had been someone reporting her for smacking him.. But to be honest if a pair of children contact the police and accuse their parents, there is going to be a major investigation and the children will be removed. Too many kids are abused and if they call the cops they need to be protected immediatly, not left in the home until the investigation is through.
- Spuy767, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2I'n a firm believer in physical punishment in extreme cases. Sometimes, a kid just won't ***** behave right and a decent hand across the ass is enough to let them know that "this ***** will not be tolerated." On the other hand, there are limits, and I have personally restrained a woman at my hotel after she slapped her 6 year old across the face, twice, for asking for a candy bar.
- dougmc, on 04/07/2008, -1/+9Similar stories happen in the US on a regular basis.
Want to screw with somebody *bad* ? Call CPS and tell them they abuse their children. CPS will go through their life with a fine tooth comb, and while they probably won't take the kids if they don't find anything, they'll still make their lives Hell for a while.- bemidia, on 04/07/2008, -1/+6And the names of the parents go on a list of child abuse complaints and stays there for three to five years.
My sister thought she was going to pull one over on my parents because they had the cops called on her boyfriend when she ran away to live with him (at the age of 16) and told CPS that my parents were starving her and locking her in her bedroom. Luckily, the lady knew she was full of *****, but now my parents' names are on that list. My dad is an electrician (he owns the company) and he can't get government contracts now. This makes me want to go beat the crap out of her for it all over again.- netant, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Put up a website, explain the details, and then query the internet for devastating suggestions as to how to get back at her. Eventually someone will suggest something that will work for you.
- bemidia, on 04/07/2008, -1/+6And the names of the parents go on a list of child abuse complaints and stays there for three to five years.
- GuitaristTom, on 04/07/2008, -3/+5Dude, all they had was a Nintendo DS, a Sony PlayStation and a computer. I say fry the bitch!
- wickensworth, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3I can't believe you've done this
- puddpunk, on 04/07/2008, -9/+3What happened? They made it against the law to beat your kids. Why should a government apologise for that?
I would love if the media would stop fanning cheap outrage every time one of these cases come to light. Do you really think "lightly smacking your kids" requires a response of 4 police officers? You don't think somebody is _slightly_ exaggerating about this? What part of "do not beat your kids" do you not understand? Use your heads.
Oh and for gods sake it's the Daily Mail - famous for whipping up ridiculous stories ... buried.- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2Corporal punishment in the home is legal in the UK.
Try doing the slightest bit of research before spewing your ignorance.
- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2Corporal punishment in the home is legal in the UK.
- ronjohn, on 04/07/2008, -8/+2Vote for Obama for change
- sjl127, on 04/07/2008, -4/+2He ain't gonna change *****. He can't. Congress does.
- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2Bush was able to do plenty in his 8 years.
- gak001, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Dude... don't start with the RonBot *****... seriously. You're making the rest of us look like nutjobs.
- sjl127, on 04/07/2008, -4/+2He ain't gonna change *****. He can't. Congress does.
- sjl127, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3Yeah, you get a swat team sent to your house to take your kid to the hospital for a stupid bump on the head... http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=595 ...
- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -3/+1Wow. Let's here it for rampant jingoism!
99 diggs and counting!
Pathetic. I remember when such "only in --insert country here--* comments were dugg down. - jimbo100, on 04/07/2008, -3/+0Two Words...
Tony Blair.
- galeninjapan, on 04/07/2008, -43/+69Socialism happened.
- ALyken, on 04/07/2008, -14/+208Haven't they got REAL crimes to solve?
- Ajajadude, on 04/07/2008, -3/+17Apparently not.
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -7/+15Since half of the real criminals have all of the money and power, authorities are hesitant to oppose them/each other. Instead, they ***** with everyone else for entertainment and to justify their pay checks
- pakakapa, on 04/07/2008, -1/+7they're too busy ignoring crimes committed by that kind of kid when they grow up and become violent sociopaths
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 04/07/2008, -3/+6That's what they were trying to determine. RTFA
(I know what you're getting at, but seriously, RTFA) - ProfessionalBum, on 04/07/2008, -2/+11Yeah. Child abuse isn't a crime
./sarcasm off
I agree that this went over the top but isn't this the very least you would expect if there actually was a problem? Initially its very hard to know if there is a problem or not but a kid coming forward is exceedingly rare so they had to take is seriously.- jackalsclaw, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2This is the best comment I have read all day. People make mistakes, the "government" is a group of people, hence they make mistakes . It sucks that it takes the courts to sometimes correct these mistakes but at least there is a way.
- Amric, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Is it really that rare?
I know my brother threatned my parent about going to the police or some such because they kept him from going out drinking with his friends (at age about 15). He didn't do it, but personally I think kids might do this as a revenge thing. They have no concept as to what might actually happen if they do. In their world they are getting back at their stupid parents. In the end what happens goes all out the window.
It is good that they act, but at the same time if the case gets dismissed, then ALL charges should be dropped, not only the legal ones but the marks in diffrent registrys as well. Otherwise you are being automatically sentenced no matter what the court decision is, that without any chance of getting cleared whatsoever. That is wrong too. - Ajajadude, on 04/08/2008, -0/+1This day-and-age I wouldn't be too surprised if this wasn't something that was happening more and more often. While this is a bit of an over-the-top example, look at these kids having parties that absolutely destroy their parents' house and think they did nothing wrong.
Assuming this woman wasn't leaving key details out or wasn't just lying, it looks like the police and social workers didn't do enough to make sure these kids were legitimately threatened by the parents. From the sounds of it, there was zero signs of abuse. Did that seem to matter? No. Instead, the police wasted taxpayer money and precious resources for REAL cases and just assumed these kids were telling the truth. Unfortunately, it seems either the response is too over the top or not enough in child abuse/neglect cases.
- MikeSD34, on 04/07/2008, -0/+6It's most definitely true that mistakes were made by the authorities, and by several others involved, but child abuse is a pretty serious accusation and has to be investigated. That sort of thing can take time because the conditions of the case are not always immediately clear to all parties involved.
- cronian, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Real child abuse is being indoctrinated with corporate propoganda in government-funded schools. Meanwhile, some unfortunate are harassed.
- OnAnyMouse, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2And some children are getting the tar beaten out of them by mummies and daddies who are rehearsed enough to bruise only under the neck line or only in otherwise - clothed areas.
Not all child abuse is obvious.
But your point is not lost: coercive indoctrination into accepting falsehoods as 'truth' is certainly abusive.
- OnAnyMouse, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2And some children are getting the tar beaten out of them by mummies and daddies who are rehearsed enough to bruise only under the neck line or only in otherwise - clothed areas.
- cronian, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Real child abuse is being indoctrinated with corporate propoganda in government-funded schools. Meanwhile, some unfortunate are harassed.
- HardSide, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Good job Sherlock!
***** off Watson
Eat it Trebek! - Frnnkdlxx, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Alex Jones Has the Answer...
- fuckingusername, on 04/07/2008, -26/+145kids today are Phucked , since you can't give them a good crack in the ass, they just say your kid has ADD take a few of these call me in the morning , They have no morals anymore.
thats why kids plan to kill their 3rd grade teacher.- rnwen2750, on 04/07/2008, -28/+10Yeah, I would be willing to bet that the kids that are going psycho and killing people or hurting people were those that were walloped on at one point or another by a parental figure. Kids who aren't hit as a punishment don't tend to use physical violence to "punish" others.
- bradsh, on 04/07/2008, -2/+8I was hit plenty as a child and have been playing violent videogames starting with duke3d when I was 10. Yet the idea of violence as any solution to a problem I find reprehensible. Perhaps the problem does not lie in media or mild loving punishment, but in a lack of parental ability in general.
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -1/+5He's saying that violent people tend to have had violence targeted toward them by their parents as a kid. I don't believe he was asserting that ALL kids who had violence against them grow up to be sociopaths/psychopaths.
And I agree with him. And yes I endured some violence from my mother when I was a child. - backslashdotcom, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2Read the comment again, and I quote "those that were walloped on at one point or another by a parental figure". If they meant to say only those who were "walloped" on ALL OF THE TIME would become violent, then they should have wrote that. But what they wrote reads as ANY person who was hit at least ONCE (or as they said ONE POINT- which means once for those of you who don't know) by a parental figure will become violent. Read what it really says and not what you think it says.
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -1/+5He's saying that violent people tend to have had violence targeted toward them by their parents as a kid. I don't believe he was asserting that ALL kids who had violence against them grow up to be sociopaths/psychopaths.
- noahhoward, on 04/07/2008, -6/+4Your years of psychiatric experience are showing.... idiot.
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -3/+3Well rnwen2750 here come the people with the n=1 statistics to defend their parents. Can someone tell me what "Stockholm Syndrome" is?
- michaelschaaf, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Muse kicks ass
- theuber1337, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2The most basic animal instinct of pain = stop is far more effective. A smack on the ass when they really deserve it is not going to harm any child mentally. It gives a much better understanding of consequences too. My parents decided to stop hitting me and do ***** like ground me, well I realized that the worst thing they can do is continue grounding me or revoking privileges until I have nothing... but what then? So I just never obeyed until they had nothing left to "punish me" with and gave up. At that point I proved as a child that not all laws have to be followed, because punishment will not always follow. Interesting huh? I, in a way, justified crime because my parents chose nonthreatening means of punishment.
Now I'm a liberal pot smoking peace protesting college student, go figure.
- bradsh, on 04/07/2008, -2/+8I was hit plenty as a child and have been playing violent videogames starting with duke3d when I was 10. Yet the idea of violence as any solution to a problem I find reprehensible. Perhaps the problem does not lie in media or mild loving punishment, but in a lack of parental ability in general.
- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -16/+5Yeah, because teaching your kids that physical violence is a legitimate way of getting what you want would totally wouldn't fit the situation you described.
- thatsmyaibo, on 04/07/2008, -2/+4What you don't understand is that kids don't understand the concept of their poor actions. But when a kid touches a hot stove, that pain will let them know not to do it again. Associating a slap on the bum or wrist can do the same with a poor action. Kids get away with so much ***** now it's ridiculous and parents have lost the meaning of discipline. As long as discipline doesn't cross the line into abuse, I see no problem with this.
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 04/07/2008, -17/+5Shut the ***** up.
- Rijnzael, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2This person is essentially correct though. These days so-called "unmanagable" children are medicated as an easy replacement for good parenting. As a society, we'd often times rather find a scapegoat than address the real truth.
No idea where the killing a 3rd grade teacher idea came from though...
- Rijnzael, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2This person is essentially correct though. These days so-called "unmanagable" children are medicated as an easy replacement for good parenting. As a society, we'd often times rather find a scapegoat than address the real truth.
- koanage, on 04/07/2008, -3/+1Wow...
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -13/+5@ ***** from everything I've seen ADD actually looks like it's the result of kids who *were* spanked or abused as children. Not the other way around...
The body learns to go into survival mode when it has to deal with parents who create a chaotic (read: violent) atmosphere. Later in life the body can't get used to relaxing because it's still stuck in this survival mode. So I wouldn't rule out that idea that ADD is caused by child abuse. How do I know this stuff? Because I know firsthand and even has a psychologist that I talk to about it. I will forever resent my mother's way of "parenting".- smurfsahoy, on 04/07/2008, -3/+6If that's a theory for ADD, then it's a pretty bizarre one. Certainly there is no psychological majority opinion among academics that ADD is being "stuck" in "survival mode."
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3Armchair psychology ftw
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4You're right my psychologist just must have fake credentials. Why don't you just refute my arguments with your own arguments?
- thatsmyaibo, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3I was clinically diagnosed with ADD nearly 18 years ago and was put on Riddlin. I was never abused as a child, it was just outlandish behavior in class. But I'm sure you know more than me and my doctors.
- smurfsahoy, on 04/07/2008, -3/+6If that's a theory for ADD, then it's a pretty bizarre one. Certainly there is no psychological majority opinion among academics that ADD is being "stuck" in "survival mode."
- SodaForJones, on 04/07/2008, -7/+1Dugg for the use of "Phucked."
- buddypriefert, on 04/07/2008, -6/+2Wow, it looks like "*****" who also uses terms like "Phucked" and "ass" is an authority on today's morals.
- uziko, on 04/07/2008, -4/+1i think the main reason why people are ***** is because people like you are so stupid they can't even spell a cuss word correctly
- arjie, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Even after having it spelled right in the username. That's the bit that really makes me laugh.
- OnAnyMouse, on 04/07/2008, -4/+1Forced medication with psychotropic drugs may not be less torturous than a good spanking.
- netant, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1But it helps the bottom line of the pharmaceutical industry. Yay corporatism!
- frsrblch, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4http://www.budster.net/videos/south-park-adhd.htm
- rnwen2750, on 04/07/2008, -28/+10Yeah, I would be willing to bet that the kids that are going psycho and killing people or hurting people were those that were walloped on at one point or another by a parental figure. Kids who aren't hit as a punishment don't tend to use physical violence to "punish" others.
- oRocketSurgeryo, on 04/07/2008, -37/+226This is disgusting. Parents should be entitled to physically punishing their children when they are acting bad. This shapes a child into an adult that understands the difference of right and wrong. These days I see kids that aren't spanked and it is very disturbing. They talk back to their elders, have no respect for anything, and are completely selfish. And what is wrong with a little punishment? There was nothing wrong with a last few generations that were spanked. This is turning more and more into a police state...As long as the parent is not abusing the child, they should be left alone. I would really hate to see what would happen to this world without child punishment.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -28/+12"There was nothing wrong with a last few generations that were spanked. "
Sweeping generalizations don't help your case in this kind of situation. They were looking out for the kid, because the kids reported abuse. Because of the report of abuse, the woman lost her job. How is that the government's fault?- oldhick, on 04/07/2008, -3/+25Because the government should stay out of your home.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -12/+7And the government WOULD have stayed out of their home had a complaint not been given by a child. Society has decided that if it's better for the government to step in if abuse is alleged. If you don't like it, move somewhere else or work to change it.
- Niightwitch, on 04/07/2008, -0/+6Yes...the kids are at fault here for filing a false report. I couldn't believe at the end of the article where she says, "Of course we don't blame the children". Why shouldn't they blame them?? They were the ones who started it all.
- Matt2k, on 04/07/2008, -3/+1> And the government WOULD have stayed out of their home had a complaint not been given by a child
An unfounded one-off allegation with no evidence and NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Government police doing their job because that's what is says on the paper to do. Yeah. You go ahead and surrender your rights to those sorts of folks. But don't ask me to do the same - Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2If you're living in Britain, you already surrendered those rights. I live in Canada where I suspect it's the same way. Likewise in the U.S. If someone cares to correct me, lease do so.
- logandurand, on 04/07/2008, -1/+6Because it's okay to violate someone's rights as long as it's in your house?
- oldhick, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Yeah, thats exactly what I said wasn't it.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -12/+7And the government WOULD have stayed out of their home had a complaint not been given by a child. Society has decided that if it's better for the government to step in if abuse is alleged. If you don't like it, move somewhere else or work to change it.
- thecosmicpope, on 04/07/2008, -2/+18The Police are Government funded. They did not investigate the claims of the children before making arrests and accusations which ended up in her losing her job and there lives being destroyed.
Children lie. Good kids often tell "little white lies" or "fibs" or whatever. Clearly, if this kid is prepared to say "F**k off you cow" to his mother, he isn't a good kid. To take this kids lies as fact without any sort of investigation is just disgraceful.- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -7/+2And what will you say to the child who has a history of lying but tells the truth?
She didn't lose her job because of the government. Would you let someone keep their job if they were accused of child abuse and they were working at a school? No, I didn't think so.- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3You would tell them the story of the boy who cried wolf and explain how they ***** it up for themselves. This is called learning through experience.
I would certainly hope that if someone is *falsely* accused of something, they would be allowed to keep their job. If that doesn't hold true, then something is very ***** up here. - Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3Precisely, and that's not the fault of the government. If anything, this woman should have raised her child better. I think she should get her job back too, but you know how people are today, one tiny thing and it gets blown out of proportion, so I doubt she'll get that particular job back.
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1She shouldn't have lost her job to begin with. That's the point.
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3You would tell them the story of the boy who cried wolf and explain how they ***** it up for themselves. This is called learning through experience.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -7/+2And what will you say to the child who has a history of lying but tells the truth?
- RockSlice, on 04/07/2008, -2/+9It's the government's fault because they acted solely on the word of a child as if it were indisputable. They should have started an investigation, meaning someone coming to check on the health and lifestyle of the child before doing anything that would leave a permanent record.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Sure except it's easy for mom and dad to not hit their child when the social services person visits. Which means the process detailed in the story had to be followed to be sure.
It's never as simple as you think it is.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Sure except it's easy for mom and dad to not hit their child when the social services person visits. Which means the process detailed in the story had to be followed to be sure.
- oldhick, on 04/07/2008, -3/+25Because the government should stay out of your home.
- fajitamelt, on 04/07/2008, -3/+32The way I see it, the 16 year old son was an ass to make up stuff about his parents to get them arrested. He should be the one being smacked. What, their "happy family" was broken up when the parents got arrested? No, It was broken up even before that. If a smack make the kid make up all these other things about his parents, he must really not like them.
- ichbeineinrcg, on 04/07/2008, -1/+29The 16 year old should spend some time in the clink for making a false report, and his parents should allow it to happen.
- TheCasablancan, on 04/07/2008, -4/+16I bet he has emo hair and wears girl pants.
- helster83, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4most spoiled, self loathing bratty 16 yr olds dislike their parents. especially ones that point out that they're spoiled, self- loathing and bratty.
- nominalgeek, on 04/07/2008, -0/+0The world around them makes them spoiled. They're made to think they deserve everything in the world, and they realize there is a power imbalance between the child and the parents in todays worlds. And like any other human being, we exploit that. It's human nature.
- lennybird, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4Strange saying this as a sixteen year old, but I'd send my son's ass to juvenile boot camp if he started pulling lies like that on me. I'm not the drill sergeant type I don't think, but there needs to be some discipline.
- mal1964, on 04/07/2008, -5/+18"This is turning more and more into a police state"
The Social Workers are the real problem most of the time- Wesside, on 04/07/2008, -2/+5Yes they are.
- helster83, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1I see that problem in the U.S. too..
- Wesside, on 04/07/2008, -2/+5Yes they are.
- zerosum, on 04/07/2008, -20/+5Physical punishment is child abuse.
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -2/+5No, it's physical punishment.
- jackalsclaw, on 04/07/2008, -1/+5Physical punishment needs to be put in context before you call it abuse. You can also abuse your child with out touching them at all.
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Completely subjective.
- soomprimal, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Agreed. People around here seem to forget that children have the right not to be physically or emotionally harmed. Spanking is not only physically detrimental and sends the wrong signal, but can also be emotionally harmful. Children are not objects, they are people with rights. Physical punishment is the method of punishment for the uncreative and frustrated parent, a brute.
- nominalgeek, on 04/07/2008, -0/+0Then what do you do, when you have a truly out of control child? Thats evil deep down to their core? Corrupted by the world outside the home? Or by drugs? Sit him in a corner and hope he actually does what you say without anything to back up your authority?
I think you would be correct in a perfect world, when children were free of out side influence and parents didn't have to combat the 24/7 advertising in the world around them. You must have very good children if you don't understand why sometimes you have to go down to a primal level to instill your authority on a out of control child. A basic level of communication that everyone can understand.- soomprimal, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1I think we disagree on this: You believe that spanking or corporal punishment is a form of communication. I believe it is a form of release for the parent and doesn't ultimately serve the needs of the parent or the child. What exactly are you communicating? That you're bigger and stronger than the child, and that is where your authority comes from, your "primal level", and not your wisdom or intellectual level.
Beating a child may shut them up for a while but unless you actually communicate with a child as to why what they're doing is wrong, you're just teaching them to solve frustrating situations with violence.
Violence breeds more violence, we need thinkers in this world.
- soomprimal, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1I think we disagree on this: You believe that spanking or corporal punishment is a form of communication. I believe it is a form of release for the parent and doesn't ultimately serve the needs of the parent or the child. What exactly are you communicating? That you're bigger and stronger than the child, and that is where your authority comes from, your "primal level", and not your wisdom or intellectual level.
- nominalgeek, on 04/07/2008, -0/+0Then what do you do, when you have a truly out of control child? Thats evil deep down to their core? Corrupted by the world outside the home? Or by drugs? Sit him in a corner and hope he actually does what you say without anything to back up your authority?
- Nobi-Wan, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2I think spanking your kid in anger is wrong. The kid needs to know that he's being punished for doing something wrong and not that his parents are hitting him because they're angry. Abuse and punishment are two different things.
- L33tmaster, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=be ...
- JulyZerg, on 04/07/2008, -12/+7Children should be able to "punish" their parents when they act like assholes... but hey, that's called assault.
- netant, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3Its not about retribution, you stupid jackass.
You have no rights, you parasitic punk.
When you have rights? When you have to support yourself, you stupid leech.- JulyZerg, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Ah, so you assume I'm not an adult? Then you call me a parasite. Very mature.
And what definition of retribution do you have, anyway?
- JulyZerg, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Ah, so you assume I'm not an adult? Then you call me a parasite. Very mature.
- netant, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3Its not about retribution, you stupid jackass.
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -7/+10Teaching kids that it's wrong to hit people and then turning right back around and then hitting the kids will NOT give a child a good understanding of what's right and wrong. On the contrary kids are smart enough to see the contradiction and this causes confusion in them.
- buddypriefert, on 04/07/2008, -5/+5You seem to be the one confused. This had nothing to do with a kid hitting someone. The kid popped of the F-bomb to his mother. Wipping his face off with a knuckle sandwich is far less damage than the little snot nosed brat will get today compared to when he's bitch slapped his jail cell from a life of crime.
- soomprimal, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1The kid and the family needs therapy, not smacking. If an 11-year old kid is talking to his mom and then making up lies to the police that way, he's going to need more than a smacking.
- theuber1337, on 04/07/2008, -3/+2On the contrary, I was smacked when I misbehaved, as were millions of children before me. When I was old enough to truly comprehend it, like 12, I understood it taught me how to behave and lost any misgivings I had for my parents because of it.
- helster83, on 04/07/2008, -3/+1Scenario: your fifteteen year old son is acting like a douche bag. Say he calls you lying sack of ***** in front of the entire family and then spits at your the face and walks out on everyone- to hang out with his equally punk friends, all because you refuse to give him an item or whatever he wants. This isn't the first occurrence, and you tried to calmly sit down with him before about his outbursts. What would you do?
Or wait, is this kind of scenario even conceivable to you?- theuber1337, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1I fail to see your point. I'd probably do what my dad did to me when I was 15-18 and telling my parents they were a bunch of ***** wastes of space. Fight him. One on one combat.
I'm kidding, I won't do what my dad did. I'd still hit him though. Sooooo... what are you trying to prove? That I was some sort of good kid so I can't understand this? Are you kidding? I was in a gang by the time I was 11. Thats the way it works where I grew up.
- theuber1337, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1I fail to see your point. I'd probably do what my dad did to me when I was 15-18 and telling my parents they were a bunch of ***** wastes of space. Fight him. One on one combat.
- helster83, on 04/07/2008, -3/+1Scenario: your fifteteen year old son is acting like a douche bag. Say he calls you lying sack of ***** in front of the entire family and then spits at your the face and walks out on everyone- to hang out with his equally punk friends, all because you refuse to give him an item or whatever he wants. This isn't the first occurrence, and you tried to calmly sit down with him before about his outbursts. What would you do?
- Daggerfall, on 04/07/2008, -5/+4Perhaps if you raised your children properly you wouldn't have to resolve to smacking them. I wasnt smacked growing up and I turned out alright and I'm sure my parents would agree.
"I would really hate to see what would happen to this world without child punishment."
Somehow you conjure up a picture of the militant next-door dad from American Beauty- DryMaltExtract, on 04/07/2008, -1/+0You sound like a condescending sack of ***** to me. Seems like your parents failed to give you a proper lesson about how to behave around others.
- JulyZerg, on 04/08/2008, -0/+1So mindlessly submitting in fear of pain is good?
- Daggerfall, on 04/09/2008, -0/+2So taking part in a discussion stems from a lack in my upbringing? And who's being condescending?
- DryMaltExtract, on 04/07/2008, -1/+0You sound like a condescending sack of ***** to me. Seems like your parents failed to give you a proper lesson about how to behave around others.
- buddypriefert, on 04/07/2008, -5/+5You seem to be the one confused. This had nothing to do with a kid hitting someone. The kid popped of the F-bomb to his mother. Wipping his face off with a knuckle sandwich is far less damage than the little snot nosed brat will get today compared to when he's bitch slapped his jail cell from a life of crime.
- ABadPerson, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2strangely this topic reminds me of Children of Men, lovely movie.
- Pritchard, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Heh. Well I've rarely had to spank my l'il sis (understand we have a 10+ year age difference between us). Because I treat her how you should. Spanking's a last resort thing, which I feel really bad about having to do. I only have to every few months these days. First she gets vocal warnings and explanations as to what she was doing was wrong. She then gets a quick second warning, which is far more assertive. Sorta like, "If you don't stop, you are going to get your ass spanked.", but the spoken words are "stop". After than, it's a spanking, an explanation, and a warning.
Also, reward good behavior. You shouldn't really make them hate you when they do something bad. You should simply promote good as much as possible. Nothing over the top. Remember, it's not good to expect a treat every time you're not bad. Then they think they're doing some kind of work by not being complete psychos. Instead, treat them as though you were treating someone your own age. Make sure they know that they are good, and can do great things and be a good person.
Use the tool of idolization rather than fear. You have to be a good example, and you have to make sure they know you mean the very best for them. - VanishingLex, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Punishment yes... thats needed as a consequence for breaking boundaries. physical punishment? is just not necessary and just breeds resentment in children and causes more problems than its worse.
My parents tried both on me, but they soon gave up on the physical when they realised it made things worse.
When I was an 11 year old I wouldnt have dreamt of swearing at my parents!!!!!
Physical punishment is just not necessary to bring kids up well.
It may work, but that doesnt make it right when you can get the same effect without it if you are jus,t you know, not a ***** parent.
Respect your kids and treat them right people. Give them positive incentives, but set firm barriers and be consistant and put the dammned time in to pay attention to things in their lives.
Also if you are accused of something by an authority figure, kicking up a fuss is NOT goign to help you be taken seriously. Whats the betting if this woman had just cooperated and politely explained there was a mistake instead of probably kicking off about insanity she would have avoided this whole debacle? - harrydeforest, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1"There was nothing wrong with a last few generations that were spanked."
Except that it's resulted in a bunch of paranoid people who arm themselves to the hilt and use agression to solve problems. Certain politicians might come to mind. - agentem, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3I see no reason why government should have a monopoly on physical punishment.
- Nanobe, on 04/07/2008, -3/+1If it gets to the point where you need to physically punish your kid, then you've done something wrong as a parent. You can earn a trusting and respectful relationship with your kid without physical punishment. But when the kid starts to see you as a big bully who uses force to get his/her way, that's when the kid becomes resentful. Then it's only a question of whether the kid will be a brat or will be simply too afraid of you to do anything. That's not the kind of relationship I want with my kids. Whether you hit your kid or send the kid to his/her room to "think", in the kid's eyes you're just being a bully, and the kid will treat you the same way kids treat school bullies.
The trick is to empathize with the kid, talk to the kid on an equal level, but also prove to the kid (through basic reasoning and demonstration) that the kid can benefit from your advanced experience. Then the kid will grow to really respect you, rather than simply fear you.
My little sister (currently 7 years old) never had the "terrible twos". Or threes. In fact, she never really acted up until at around age 5 or 6 my parents started getting into the habit of spanking her or sending her to her room for the smallest things. Now she resents their dominating attitude and she acts up all the time. My parents respond by spanking her or sending her to her room, and the problem just gets worse and worse. It doesn't work.- crawfishDigger, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1You obviously are quite young and naive. What you've written is a recipe for disaster. This is why it's good to be in your 20's or 30's before you have kids of your own.
- tony23, on 04/08/2008, -0/+1"f it gets to the point where you need to physically punish your kid, then you've done something wrong as a parent. "
Clearly spoken as someone who has never been a parent.
- 42Vindictive, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1I was born in '91, and I was smacked bare butt with a wooden spoon (ouch!) I turned out okay so far, but I think I was one of the last :(
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -28/+12"There was nothing wrong with a last few generations that were spanked. "
- syroncoda, on 04/07/2008, -76/+21meh, find a new way of punishing your child. abuse is abuse regardless of the "feelings" behind it. *****.
- jon30041, on 04/07/2008, -6/+13... HOW can you find a new way of punishing them if punishment, in and of itself, is disallowed?
Grow up. Maybe if you'd gotten hit you'd understand the importance of it. I know I do, my dad used a damn paddle.- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -14/+4Punishment isn't disallowed, only certain forms of it. Learn to make the distinction and keep your arguments in context.
Grow up. Maybe if your dad wasn't such a dick you wouldn't be a hyperviolent dickface who cannot understand there are *other* forms of punishment. Corporal punishment *can* have a place, but that doesn't mean it always does or should go completely unregulated.- Issius, on 04/07/2008, -5/+13*****. You are an ignorant ***** if you believe that just because a parent gave their kids a good whipping when they do something they know is wrong they are abusing the child. Why don't you grow up and realize that not everything needs to be talked out because some kids are just rebellious for no ***** reason. I'm not saying that child abuse is right, but some kids need a beating every now and then so that they learn how to act in society.
It's people like you that are ruining our kids today. I'm also sure you're the type of person who bans games like dodge ball because someone might get left out.- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -12/+1I contend that *you* are an ignorant ***** who doesn't know how to read. I explicitly stated that corporal punishment can be necessary, but it should be a last-resort punishment, especially at ages where reasoning and logic can be appealed to via communication or other forms of punishment. Teaching them violence is an acceptable remedy/punishment for a wide range of situations is NOT teaching them "how to act in society".
No, it is people like you who perpetuate cycles of violence in our society. I do not believe in non-punishment and helping kids to compete with each other over petty cosmetic/superficial BS like clothes, cars, cellphones etc just because the other kids have them. As far as banning games because kids might get left out, at most I might encourage coaches to pick the teams or drawing names from a hat. The only games/sports I might consider banning are violent and contact sports where kids can seriously hurt each other before they are mature enough to maintain their aggression properly, don't be stupid.
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -12/+1I contend that *you* are an ignorant ***** who doesn't know how to read. I explicitly stated that corporal punishment can be necessary, but it should be a last-resort punishment, especially at ages where reasoning and logic can be appealed to via communication or other forms of punishment. Teaching them violence is an acceptable remedy/punishment for a wide range of situations is NOT teaching them "how to act in society".
- theuber1337, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3You're not even the good type of non-violent hippie. You're a neo-hippie prick.
- Issius, on 04/07/2008, -5/+13*****. You are an ignorant ***** if you believe that just because a parent gave their kids a good whipping when they do something they know is wrong they are abusing the child. Why don't you grow up and realize that not everything needs to be talked out because some kids are just rebellious for no ***** reason. I'm not saying that child abuse is right, but some kids need a beating every now and then so that they learn how to act in society.
- rnwen2750, on 04/07/2008, -4/+10"Punishment" does not have to involve violence. Some of us wish to use logic, reason, and discussion in our arguments rather than just "smacking" a lesson into a kid.
- merowe, on 04/07/2008, -2/+7And how do you reason with a child that is 3 or 4 years old? Sometimes, the only thing a child will listen to is a smack on the ass...
- jackalsclaw, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2children 3 to 4 have some reasoning skills, but one of the things they figure out is misbehaving gets them attention (even if it's being yelled out).
- theuber1337, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2The most basic animal instinct of pain = stop is far more effective. A smack on the ass when they really deserve it is not going to harm any child mentally. It gives a much better understanding of consequences too. My parents decided to stop hitting me and do ***** like ground me, well I realized that the worst thing they can do is continue grounding me or revoking privileges until I have nothing... but what then? So I just never obeyed until they had nothing left to "punish me" with and gave up. At that point I proved as a child that not all laws have to be followed, because punishment will not always follow. Interesting huh? I, in a way, justified crime because my parents chose nonthreatening means of punishment.
Now I'm a liberal pot smoking peace protesting college student, go figure.
- fyngyrz, on 04/07/2008, -0/+10And some kids will respond to logic, reason, and discussion. Your experience is not everyone's experience, and your "way" is not the only way. Raising children is not a cut and dried situation where you can apply some boilerplate methodology and expect similar results.
Yes, if a kid shows obvious physical damage, the state should look into it. No, the state should not have carte blanche to waltz into the middle of a dynamically balanced family and inflict the politically correct stupidity of the day (like the bewildered and moronic idea that smacking a kid for a serious infraction of the family rules is by definition a "bad thing.")
Some kids will never need to be smacked, even in the strictest of environments. Others will, even in the most permissive environments. Wake up and smell the coffee -- people are not produced by cookie cutters.
- merowe, on 04/07/2008, -2/+7And how do you reason with a child that is 3 or 4 years old? Sometimes, the only thing a child will listen to is a smack on the ass...
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -14/+4Punishment isn't disallowed, only certain forms of it. Learn to make the distinction and keep your arguments in context.
- Zarokima, on 04/07/2008, -5/+13Smacking your child is not abuse. Smacking =/= beating
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -11/+5Depends on the frequency of the smacking, age of the child, and the offense(s) that they are administered over. Smacking kids around unnecessarily can ***** a kid up as bad or worse than always using non-corporate punishment
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Because in this case, the lady unnecessarily beat the living ***** out of her child. Ooookay.
Also, how does someone with a name like smotpoker get to be so bent out of shape like this.- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2Who said I was bent out of shape or that she was beating the hell out of her child in this case? It looked like a general statement that wasn't intended to be applied only/specifically to this case but wasn't completely accurate, so I qualified it.
Making inaccurate generalizations is a no-no - such as your apparent assumptions/assertions that a person who smokes pot must do so 24/7, cannot become agitated and cannot make valid corrections/statements. Trying to take advantage of negative/inaccurate stereotypes by attacking credibility/validity with them is also bad.
Don't feel bad though, I'm sure plenty of close-minded assfaces found your critique amusing and well-warranted. Bravo!! - Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Struck a nerve there, didn't I.
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Do you want a cookie?
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1I wouldn't mind one.
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2Who said I was bent out of shape or that she was beating the hell out of her child in this case? It looked like a general statement that wasn't intended to be applied only/specifically to this case but wasn't completely accurate, so I qualified it.
- Luminoth, on 04/07/2008, -2/+1Because in this case, the lady unnecessarily beat the living ***** out of her child. Ooookay.
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -11/+5Depends on the frequency of the smacking, age of the child, and the offense(s) that they are administered over. Smacking kids around unnecessarily can ***** a kid up as bad or worse than always using non-corporate punishment
- erkokite, on 04/07/2008, -2/+9Like hell, it's abuse. It has worked brilliantly for thousands of years. My parents and grandparents and their parents, et cetera, all turned out quite well. It is abuse when you hit your child out of anger or with the intention of harming them. A little stinging isn't harm, and is perfectly fine IMHO if done with the intent of edification, and not in excess.
- jackalsclaw, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2why does everyone think the past was fine. A lot of bad ***** happen in the past and just cause people survived it doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. Our ancestors survived long enough to reproduce without generally living past 50, you think modern medicine is an improvement over the past? Also our world has changed quite a bit and the environment a child grows up with is different, so there is no reason to believe the "success" of the past would work today.
- tnoy, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2Haha, you'll be saying something different when you have kids of your own. Oh wait... nevermind.
- twertyto, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2Clearly you did not read the article. The article talks very little about the virtues of corporal punishment.
- eltrev, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2you need a good spanking.
- chetanw, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Clearly, your parents believed in this nonsense that you are spewing out here...
- jon30041, on 04/07/2008, -6/+13... HOW can you find a new way of punishing them if punishment, in and of itself, is disallowed?
- cyberdork, on 04/07/2008, -61/+14News flash to father: Corporal punishment has been outlawed for years in the majority of developed countries!
- carpespasm, on 04/07/2008, -3/+24source?
- JimmySpaza, on 04/07/2008, -10/+5And look at those developing countries...most are cesspools of immorality and filth. Your point?
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -9/+3He said "developed", not "developing"
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2Uhh... why the ***** is my correction-comment for accuracy being buried more than the comment I'm correcting within a shorter time frame? It's becoming more and more apparent that none of your morons have any place dictating what is or isn't appropriate for *anyone*, let alone impressionable children if you are intolerant of accuracy or cannot determine which comments are neutral/objective.
EAT A ***** EVERYONE WHO BURIES THIS COMMENT AND MY PARENT COMMENT ABOVE - Have a nice day
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2Uhh... why the ***** is my correction-comment for accuracy being buried more than the comment I'm correcting within a shorter time frame? It's becoming more and more apparent that none of your morons have any place dictating what is or isn't appropriate for *anyone*, let alone impressionable children if you are intolerant of accuracy or cannot determine which comments are neutral/objective.
- talonstriker, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1you're right spaza, only the western morals are the correct morals. Only western culture is the correct culture. Only western religion(s) are the correct religion(s). Everything else is filth, and immoral and god will send them all to hell.
/s
- smotpoker, on 04/07/2008, -9/+3He said "developed", not "developing"
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -4/+8And apparently so has the right to parent one's own children. Seems more like parents are nothing more than babysitters raising future workers/drones/military for the government.
- jackalsclaw, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2It's the governments job to protect all of it's citizens (from each other in this case). The problem here is that the system set up by the government made a mistake and that caused system break down. I hate the fact that she was fired for being suspected of committing a crime. The system is set up to find innocent people Innocent not avoid contact between the police and innocent people. you sometimes need to investigate a person to clear them of wrong doing, to do
should not be held against a person.
- jackalsclaw, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2It's the governments job to protect all of it's citizens (from each other in this case). The problem here is that the system set up by the government made a mistake and that caused system break down. I hate the fact that she was fired for being suspected of committing a crime. The system is set up to find innocent people Innocent not avoid contact between the police and innocent people. you sometimes need to investigate a person to clear them of wrong doing, to do
- Xios117, on 04/08/2008, -0/+1And look where it's gotten us, *****.
- h0ser, on 04/07/2008, -19/+106Parent's should be able to smack their children. Many children need it. Most children don't know what is right and wrong, so they do whatever they want. If there isn't a parent their to smack their ass when they get too close to the fire, they are gonna get burnt. Just telling the child NO isn't enough. Some people think you can take away your childs toys and stuff like that, but if the child has no toys then that logic will never work.
You shouldn't punch you kid in the face, but a smack in the ass will do him good.- f4nt0m4s, on 04/07/2008, -4/+12I’ve read (and I’m sure you can find a conflicting study) that you should only spank your kid for an immediate result, like your fire example for instance. Another example is, if your child is about to run across the street and there is a car coming, you can spank them and say “no!” I guess it’s supposed to act as reinforcement. Hitting your kid because they are swearing at you is bad parenting because you should be able to raise your kid so he is not swearing at you in the first place. Respect cannot be reinforced by spanking your kid constantly. That’s why I think this story stinks; no kid should be calling their mother a “***** cow” or whatever. If that is allowed then the parents dropped the parenting ball way earlier in the kid’s life.
- aboyd, on 04/07/2008, -0/+8Unfortunately, saying they dropped the ball earlier doesn't help, because EVERY parent drops the ball at some point, in some way. We're talking about humans, not computers. They cannot possibly make every right decision in every situation. And even when parents DO make good decisions, the child is an independent being that can accept the decisions or crash up against them. Just as parents can make mistakes, so can the child -- as the child in this story did. Therefore, you MUST have an integrated solution for the pitfalls of parenting. Saying, "sorry, you shouldn't have spanked the kid because you should have raised them so you didn't need to spank them in the first place" is a non-solution. It's unrealistic and does nothing but make the situation worse, as now the parent is caught second-guessing everything and trying to figure out how to be perfect amidst a nearly infinite set of variables.
- f4nt0m4s, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3My apologies, I wasn't trying to make a generalization for parenting, I was just trying to make a case for the one-sidedness of this article. I'd love to completely agree with the mom in this story, but the story is missing the perspective of the children, the police, the child services, and even her husband/the rest of the family.
One sided stories that sound too good to be true usually are too good to be true.
- f4nt0m4s, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3My apologies, I wasn't trying to make a generalization for parenting, I was just trying to make a case for the one-sidedness of this article. I'd love to completely agree with the mom in this story, but the story is missing the perspective of the children, the police, the child services, and even her husband/the rest of the family.
- pilot3033, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2I feel I've been raised pretty well myself, and I have always loved and cared for my parents, but I still gave them hell when I was a teenager. That's what kids do, that's part of asserting your independence, and exploring freedom. Testing those boundaries are an important part of development. Parents need to have the patients to continue to offer guidance, discipline, and know that their child will come out on the other side.
- aboyd, on 04/07/2008, -0/+8Unfortunately, saying they dropped the ball earlier doesn't help, because EVERY parent drops the ball at some point, in some way. We're talking about humans, not computers. They cannot possibly make every right decision in every situation. And even when parents DO make good decisions, the child is an independent being that can accept the decisions or crash up against them. Just as parents can make mistakes, so can the child -- as the child in this story did. Therefore, you MUST have an integrated solution for the pitfalls of parenting. Saying, "sorry, you shouldn't have spanked the kid because you should have raised them so you didn't need to spank them in the first place" is a non-solution. It's unrealistic and does nothing but make the situation worse, as now the parent is caught second-guessing everything and trying to figure out how to be perfect amidst a nearly infinite set of variables.
- smurfsahoy, on 04/07/2008, -8/+1Negative reinforcement (taking away happy things) and positive reinforcement (praising them when they do the RIGHT things, or giving treats to younger children) have been shown many times to be more effective in pretty much every parenting situation than any kind of punishment.
Why would a kid have no toys at all? That's bad parenting in itself right there, which needs to be fixed before we start talking about how to control behavior. A kid with no toys at all will have no stimulation and cannot learn and grow. That's terrible.
Note that "toys" doesn't have to mean 50 bazillion toys bought at an expensive toy store. A "toy"/privilege could be some random second hand, safe object from your home that you give the kid to play with. Or a television, or a phone (for teenagers). Anything at all that they enjoy but don't need can be taken away for negative reinforcement. It doesn't matter how poor you are or anything like that. All kids have some things they enjoy and play with, and you can always use that. If they have nothing, they need to be given something.- spectecjr, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Read the article. They had toys - a playstation, a DS and a computer. They're older kids; they're not going to be playing with Thomas the Tank Engine.
- smurfsahoy, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Likewise, if you had read my comment, you would have seen that by "toy" I mean anything they use for fun that isn't necessary.
Take away the playstation, the computer, online privileges, etc. Is this really such a difficult logical connection to draw here? Come on. Conditioning works on everybody, even full grown adults.
- smurfsahoy, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Likewise, if you had read my comment, you would have seen that by "toy" I mean anything they use for fun that isn't necessary.
- spectecjr, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Read the article. They had toys - a playstation, a DS and a computer. They're older kids; they're not going to be playing with Thomas the Tank Engine.
- jp12380, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3I do what I want!!
- neuens07, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1When I was a kid, I was smacked when I did something bad and I can guarantee you that I never did it again. My dad had a girlfriend and she never disciplined her kid. Whenever anyone told him to do anything, he would say, "No, you can't tell me what to do." Of course, his mom let it go because she thought that was what she should be doing, but my dad wouldn't let him get away with it. The kid threatened to call the cops because my dad sent him to his room, and when he wouldn't go, my dad picked him up and brought him to his room. I can't remember the countless times he said "You don't have the right to touch me!" ....... Don't parents see what they are doing? Don't let your kids away with things. Discipline them or they will get the idea that they can do whatever they want. For those of you who were spanked as a kid, would you change the way you were raised? I know I wouldn't, and I know that MY kids will be raised the same way as my father raised me. Thanks Dad for doing a damned good job.
- f4nt0m4s, on 04/07/2008, -4/+12I’ve read (and I’m sure you can find a conflicting study) that you should only spank your kid for an immediate result, like your fire example for instance. Another example is, if your child is about to run across the street and there is a car coming, you can spank them and say “no!” I guess it’s supposed to act as reinforcement. Hitting your kid because they are swearing at you is bad parenting because you should be able to raise your kid so he is not swearing at you in the first place. Respect cannot be reinforced by spanking your kid constantly. That’s why I think this story stinks; no kid should be calling their mother a “***** cow” or whatever. If that is allowed then the parents dropped the parenting ball way earlier in the kid’s life.
- mentallyinhell, on 04/07/2008, -11/+75I would have smacked him too. What kind of self righteous ***** would call the cops on a parent for discipline? So long as nobody's going overboard, a parent is allowed the disciplinary actions he or she feels are appropriate.
And she gave the kid a warning. More than I ever got.- wastedfish, on 04/07/2008, -3/+5In a parallel universe:
CHILD ABUSE CONTINUES FOR 5 YEARS, COPS CALLED YET FAILED TO APPREHEND PARENTS.
I agree with all the comments about this being overboard based on the information given. At the same time sometimes these cops are in tricky situations and I'm guessing the dad wouldn't have been locked up if he said the right things and remained calm.- aboyd, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4"CHILD ABUSE CONTINUES FOR 5 YEARS, COPS CALLED YET FAILED TO APPREHEND PARENTS."
That's not a viable counter argument. Instead, it's an argument that police & child services are getting it wrong on both sides. They need to have better discernment and start acting on the things that need action, and using a lighter touch on the things that need a lighter touch.
The idea of "if we didn't act, years from now you'd accuse us of not acting sooner" is also completely false in context of this story, apparently. According to what we've read, the parents were not even interviewed at first, much less had their house watched or inspected. That's ridiculous, and part of why the case was thrown out of court -- they assumed guilt without getting any corroborating evidence! If the agency and police had done their JOBS, they would have taken action, yes, but the action would have been "gather evidence first."
It seems in many of these cases, they act without much supporting evidence, and get blamed for it, and in other cases fail to act even when multiple people have called, sent photos of abuse, etc. And so they blamed for that too. But if they simply responded to cases that seemed real and had a valid case, they would do much better. That's why I personally get angry at this stuff. It's not about "I want to beat my kids" or "I want foster parents for any kid who doesn't get an PS3." Instead, it's "Why the hell can't these agencies ACT PROFESSIONALLY?"- giskard88, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1well, they need to be able to separate the parties quickly. If a kids complained, you don't send them back to the abuser. at best they'll scare the hell out of the kid and the complaint is withdrawn, and at worst the kid ends up dead. the issue is the ***** up that occurred after that. placing the kids with a random family that happened to stick their nose in, rather than foster care or a relative. making an arrest before all of the facts are clear. waiting days before interviewing the parent, and finaly not dropping the issue when it became clear that the whole thing was a crock.
- aboyd, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4"CHILD ABUSE CONTINUES FOR 5 YEARS, COPS CALLED YET FAILED TO APPREHEND PARENTS."
- agentem, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Social workers are conditioned to report ANYTHING and believe that if they do not report any sign of potential abuse they can be criminally liable if a child is being abused. There's absolutely no room for discretion.
The system has to change.
- wastedfish, on 04/07/2008, -3/+5In a parallel universe:
- jedmed, on 04/07/2008, -9/+45In an ideal world populated by perfect people, physical punishment should not be tolerated. But in the real world sometimes it is necessary to sternly set limits and boundaries to behaviors that threaten the child's emotional or social well-being.
Our phobic attitude towards physical discipline is unhealthy. The result of which has created the current "system" which enables children to aggressively manipulate and blackmail their parents. This in a society that is so alienated that neighbors no longer speak with each other.
Yes, it is both possible and preferable never to hit your child. But the current solution is a far worse form of abuse.- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -4/+14In a world populated by perfect people, children would never misbehave and need to be disciplined or punished. But the world isn't perfect.
- MikeSD34, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2Children are behaving like children are supposed to behave, and in reality, like all people behave. It doesn't really get more perfect than that. They're curious about the world around them. We touch the fire, and we learn that it's hot. We aren't likely to repeat that mistake. As children, we push our parents buttons to see how far we can go until they push back. If they don't push back, we keep going. If you don't set boundaries for your children, they will have no boundaries at all.
- davedelong, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3FTA: "Without discipline in the home, children grow up with no sense of right and wrong." I agree that discipline can be necessary. But what kind of home did this kid grow up in if he had the audacity to tell his own mother to "F*** off"?
- jedmed, on 04/09/2008, -0/+1Exactly.
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -4/+14In a world populated by perfect people, children would never misbehave and need to be disciplined or punished. But the world isn't perfect.
- coffee200am, on 04/07/2008, -8/+88Guy doesn't deserve a real mother. Let the State listen to his baby tantrums.
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 04/07/2008, -6/+1He's 11 years old.
- Pake, on 04/07/2008, -1/+6To the orphanage he goes! Pay them to take care of his ass with as minimal as possible for about 2 years and he'll be begging to come home. Works out real well for all parties. Parents don't spend as much on the kid, kid learns his lesson, and the orphanage make get a small profit off the kid for taking care of him.
- MikeSD34, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4The way I read it, he figured out after less than a week that he had pretty seriously ***** up.
- Pake, on 04/07/2008, -0/+3Maybe, but it still sounds like a fun idea.
- MikeSD34, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4The way I read it, he figured out after less than a week that he had pretty seriously ***** up.
- Pake, on 04/07/2008, -1/+6To the orphanage he goes! Pay them to take care of his ass with as minimal as possible for about 2 years and he'll be begging to come home. Works out real well for all parties. Parents don't spend as much on the kid, kid learns his lesson, and the orphanage make get a small profit off the kid for taking care of him.
- weirddave, on 04/07/2008, -7/+4No, Guy deserves a real mother. The problem is that he never had one.
She blamed the neighbors down the street for corrupting him because they let their kids do whatever they want, but isn't she the one who let Guy go to their house?
In reality, they are all victims of the Nanny state. The mom doesn't feel the need to raise her children correctly. She eventually sets down the law, and the spoiled brat takes advantage of their perverted police state.
I wasn't raised perfectly, but I can't imagine myself calling the police for something like this, even when I was only 11 years old.- buddypriefert, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2Right. I get the impression from the mom's writting that Guy evidently was very comfortable with the F-bomb. I'd had gotten a smack (plus a few hours of detention) from using "turd". F-bombs were unheard of and would mean certain death.
- shakbhaji, on 04/07/2008, -2/+2I'm not your Guy, Buddeh!
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 04/07/2008, -6/+1He's 11 years old.
- saxreturns, on 04/07/2008, -17/+71Buried for being from the Daily Fail, purveyor of badly written half-truth and rumour.
- doubledmateo, on 04/07/2008, -2/+4Yeah, this article didn't have a lot of journalistic integrity. We're only getting one side of the story here. If that truely is how it went down then I'd agree that it's messed up. I have trouble believing that though.
- lul101, on 04/07/2008, -0/+6Bloody hell! i thought the stories at the right side were ads! What kind of news site is this?
- jeffsteez, on 04/07/2008, -0/+0Daily Mail staff clearly game digg.
Their articles are here most days. They represent the polar opposite of what I consider to be the typical digg readers, they are tabloid and right wing.
- coffee200am, on 04/07/2008, -5/+22 Why using a condom is sometimes good....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWkZ_StRjU0- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -0/+14"Sometimes good"? I'd say the vast majority of the time, using a condom is very good.
- frositay, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Why not the pill? At least sex feels good then.
- exomni, on 04/07/2008, -0/+14"Sometimes good"? I'd say the vast majority of the time, using a condom is very good.
- concretewave, on 04/07/2008, -36/+5I was never hit as a child and I turned out fine. Physical violence against children has no place in this world. I don't care how badly they are behaving. Argue if you will, but there IS always another way.
- Buelldozer, on 04/07/2008, -7/+17The prisons are filled with the children of parents who believe as you do.
- rnwen2750, on 04/07/2008, -7/+5You arrogant, ignorant man. Most people who are in prison report having had parental figures use corporal punishment on them as children. There is a distinctly lower percentage of people in the penal system who report never having been the subject of corporal punishment.
- DeskFlyer, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4*Citation needed
- concretewave, on 04/07/2008, -5/+2My parents believe as I do, so according to you the prison is full of people like me?
Prison must be a haven, then. - doubledmateo, on 04/07/2008, -3/+0Do you honestly believe that the prison's are the product of children not being physically punished, or do you just say it to justify it for yourself? I don't personally have anything against spanking a child if it's a logical consequence (i.e. they try to step out onto a busy street where they could be physically hamed, I would swat them on the behind as an immediate physical reminder.) but I think parents are entitled to decide this stuff for themselves (to a degree anyways) but I don't think there is any published statistic that would show that children benefit socially from being spanked. There are plenty of criminals that will report savage beatings as they grew up though.
- rnwen2750, on 04/07/2008, -7/+5You arrogant, ignorant man. Most people who are in prison report having had parental figures use corporal punishment on them as children. There is a distinctly lower percentage of people in the penal system who report never having been the subject of corporal punishment.
- JimmySpaza, on 04/07/2008, -6/+4Yeah, like maybe a timeout or taking away your X-Box? Please. Consider yourself lucky as well as the exception to the rule. Most kids turn out alright BECAUSE of discipline and punishment, not in spite of.
- Conwaysb0718, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4Didnt this whole fiasco start because the mom took away the gaming consoles?
- Pake, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2All that means is she should have skipped the step and did what most parents do: Grab a belt.
- fxu1989, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1@Pake:
Belt ?
I'm sorry, I didn't hear you over the sound how I was getting my ass kicked with 2x4s.
- Conwaysb0718, on 04/07/2008, -1/+4Didnt this whole fiasco start because the mom took away the gaming consoles?
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -4/+14Then you are the exception, not the rule. You're not a parent, are you. When kids know they can walk all over parents, then they do. If your kid is screaming and hitting his little sister, how would you handle it? Sometimes kids just won't listen, and if spanking isn't at least an OPTION, even if not one frequently utilized, then kids have even less incentive to listen. They can get out of being groundd by walking out of the house, but they aren't getting out of being spanked.
- DeskFlyer, on 04/07/2008, -0/+5Where the heck is Maddox when you need him?
- Buelldozer, on 04/07/2008, -7/+17The prisons are filled with the children of parents who believe as you do.
- mrgeekguy, on 04/07/2008, -10/+60Don't call me guy, buddy!
- TheAmbushAhead, on 04/07/2008, -7/+29I'm not your buddy, friend!
- friendlyman, on 04/07/2008, -2/+23I'm not your friend, guy!
- TheAtomicMoose, on 04/07/2008, -1/+7I'm not your guy, C-c-c-c!
- drafhk, on 04/07/2008, -1/+11I'm not your boyfriend.
*****. - ivansusanin, on 04/07/2008, -0/+6I'm not guy
- friendlyman, on 04/07/2008, -2/+23I'm not your friend, guy!
- Tripacer9999, on 04/07/2008, -24/+10Shut the ***** up for the love of god.
- DeskFlyer, on 04/07/2008, -0/+6Lead by example.
- kjajames, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Shut the love up for the ***** of god?
- TheAmbushAhead, on 04/07/2008, -7/+29I'm not your buddy, friend!
- Apokalyps2547, on 04/07/2008, -7/+13The parents' side of the story when child services comes around is always the same. This was no exception.
I'm not saying she's wrong, I'm not saying she's right.
I would like to hear the Department's take on it, though.- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -1/+5What good would that possibly do. The only important thing that needs to be heard is why the kid thought he'd run off and tell the government he was being abused.
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3Yeah I wonder where he learned that kind of behavior from... he he
Seriously is there ANYONE in this story who doesn't deserve some blame? Just goes to show how sometimes there's enough blame to go more than just "around".
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -1/+3Yeah I wonder where he learned that kind of behavior from... he he
- joshtj, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Also one aspect you don't mention is often they're placed in terrible homes. The families do it merely to get their income supplemented, and they will not receive the love and attention they deserve. Often once children are placed on foster homes, they cycle through them quickly and end up in a situation far worse then their families, all due to their own guilt and a broken system.
- Independentsam, on 04/07/2008, -0/+5I find this story highly suspicious myself. Admittedly, I am not familiar with Great Britain's child protection rules, but was a Child Protection Services for five years in Wyoming. I also realize that state statutes vary in this country. To be brief, here are a few things I learned as far as Wyoming is concerned.
1. It is not abuse to slap a child unless there was sufficient force to leave a mark. On a few occasions I have personally viewed a kid's face in which palm and fingers imprints are clear. Use of fists, weapons ( hair brushes, wooden paddles, and my favorite: coat hangers) repeat idly with multiple bruises, wounds, etc. are considered abuse, but it has to be proven that the wounds came from the hand of a parent or authority figure.
2. 85% of all referrals are unfounded. Some have to do with someone seeing what they perceived as abuse. Many are malicious. A child will often concoct being victimized by a parent (often step parent) believing that by making a false report, their parents will have to let them do as they please out of fear. In my personal experience, most unfounded allegations are made by spouses in the middle of divorce (or attempting to modify an existing divorce decree) attempting to appear the better parent in Court.
3. While only 15% of allegations result in charges being filed. No one can assume at the onset that the allegations are false. Thus (in Wyoming) interviewing a kid immediately is permitted. This is not to "save the kid" but to assure that abusive parents do not have the opportunity to intimidate the alleged victim from recanting. The parents are immediately notified and are often understandably upset, fearing the worst.
4. In Wyoming, a CPS worker does not have the right to put a kid in protective custody. This can only be done by law enforcement or a judge. Physicians who believe abuse has transpired can usually convince a cop or Judge to initiate protective custody. Few do so fearing being sued.
5. Within 48 hours, a kid in protective custody and their parents appear in front of a District Court Judge to determine if continued out of home placement is warranted. No District Attorney is willing to press for removal unless there is considerable evidence to justify the action. If a kid is placed in foster care temporarily or permanently, the foster parents have had their backgrounds researched thoroughly to assure their competency. Foster parents also have to take required classes before being approved and have to continue taking them each year.
6. For the most part, parents and children are reunited in less than thirty days if abuse is pr oven. In these cases, parents , kids (often both) have to participate in therapy. Psychological evaluations may be ordered by the Court for any combination of: a parent, both parents, the victim and possibly siblings. Only in severe abuse cases are kids removed from their parents for long periods of time. In these cases, usually at least one parent is convicted of abuse and either incarcerated or placed on supervised probation. Regaining custody in these cases can utilize supervised visits between parents and kids before the family is reunited. Specific case plans are written that address what each family member has to do in order to get CPS out of their lives. Only in rare occasions does this process exceed a year due to non compliance with the case plan.
I have typed long enough. I am tempted to begin describing another common scenario: Parents who want their kids removed from their homes without having to pay any support. I am too tired to continue with that theme.
Bottom line. Child protection is not perfect. I do believe that on rare occasions, innocent parents loose their kids. That said in Wyoming, "family reunification" is the goal in all but the most horrid abuse cases.
There is no doubt, that being notified that you are suspected of abusing your kids is a terrible experience. Again, 85% of the time there is no merit to the allegations and often the kid is told "If you continue saying F##k you to your parents, and refusing their reasonable requests, your actions will move you from Child Protection to Juvenile Probation." In those cases, the possibility of the kid going to a boot camp environment is greatly enhanced.
Again, while this story originates from England, I find it very suspicious. While possible that this happened as the result of a slap, my guess is that there is considerably more to the story. In order to protect abused kids release of the specific story cannot be released.
- Jimbob200, on 04/07/2008, -1/+5What good would that possibly do. The only important thing that needs to be heard is why the kid thought he'd run off and tell the government he was being abused.
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -11/+48When I was a child, we lived in an area where spanking children was a common punishment. When we moved during my early teen years to a state where spanking wasn't allowed, I was past the age of spanking, but my younger brother wasn't. Since spanking wasn't allowed, he had no incentive to not do something. Sending him to his room did no good. He'd walk out of the house instead. Take his consoles away and he'd go play at a friend's house. Take away his allowance and he'd steal what he wanted and if he was caught, my parents' legal option was to send him to his room, but again he'd walk out of the house.
See, what they were allowed to spank me, there was no just turning around walking out of the house.
Guess which one ended up the trouble-maker and which has a successful career. Yup, the one who couldn't be spanked ended up in a ton of trouble.
Now I'm not for spanking as a first line of punishment, but if it's an available option, then kids will listen. I wasn't spanked very often at all, maybe every three or four months, if that, but just knowing my parents could spank me if I didn't stop and listen was usually enough to keep me in line.- Zarokima, on 04/07/2008, -4/+7I would have spanked the little ***** anyway if that's how he behaved. ***** the legality of it, if my children deserve a spanking they're damn well going to get it because I refuse to let them grow up doing whatever the hell they want with no consequences only to end up terrible people. It's not fair to the children to end up like that when all it would have taken to prevent it is a firm smack on the behind from the parents. That said, I agree it definitely shouldn't be the first choice, and if a child never needs a spanking then good for them, they're abnormally well-behaved.
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -1/+16The double-edge to that sword is that if my parents would have spanked him anyway, then we both would have been taken away. Basically they could lose one of us or both of us because the government refused to let them be parents. Families have gone to hell overall since the government decided its way is the one and only right way. Look at the state of public education, and now California is trying to outlaw homeschooling because Uncle Government knows best? What are we, property of the government? Wait, I know the answer to that.
- siekosunfire, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1What state was this in? I was unaware of any states that had outlawed spanking; however, I do know that California and Massachusetts were/are trying to.
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -1/+16The double-edge to that sword is that if my parents would have spanked him anyway, then we both would have been taken away. Basically they could lose one of us or both of us because the government refused to let them be parents. Families have gone to hell overall since the government decided its way is the one and only right way. Look at the state of public education, and now California is trying to outlaw homeschooling because Uncle Government knows best? What are we, property of the government? Wait, I know the answer to that.
- rnwen2750, on 04/07/2008, -9/+3Well, perhaps your parents were ineffective. He obviously didn't learn his lesson when he was being beaten, so what makes you think he would when you moved to a state where you couldn't beat him? This is ***** ridiculous. I am sick of parents forgoing actual work with their kids for the less time-consuming, less cerebral punishment by the fist.
- erkokite, on 04/07/2008, -0/+4You're a real sicko if you hit your kids with your fist. A spanking just hurts, and is not administered with the fist. It does ZERO damage. Like the OP said, his brother WAS NOT spanked, and HE is the one who ended being a problem.
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2David responded when spanking was an option. When we moved, he became a tyrant. Spanking was a last resort and it upset my parents severely when they had to.
- keltin, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Then there was an application of the flexible yardstick against bare legs: Older brother liked to break off coloured wax from a decorative candle, and then chew on it. Mom didn't know who did it, so told both kids not to do it anymore. WHen older bro did it again, I remember hearing the statement, "I'll strike the first one until he either confesses.
I was first selected got about four or five traumatizing (not) licks with the flexible yard stick. As soon as she was finished, my brother confessed.
- keltin, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1Then there was an application of the flexible yardstick against bare legs: Older brother liked to break off coloured wax from a decorative candle, and then chew on it. Mom didn't know who did it, so told both kids not to do it anymore. WHen older bro did it again, I remember hearing the statement, "I'll strike the first one until he either confesses.
- keltin, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2If you decide to have children, you'll be the one I hope has them, not some idiot that has no idea why kids won't behave if they have no incentive. You're one of the best, Aristar.
Of course, you'll have to move out of that state you're in, if it's still one of those, "Don't touch me!" places.- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2My husband-to-be (I'm a girl) and I hope to have them. I believe California is still currently a state that allows parents to be parents, but with all this progressive bull *****, I wouldn't doubt if spanking is actually illegal.
- Vowieotw, on 04/07/2008, -0/+8My parents rarely spanked me, but they used the fear of punishment instead. If we were somewhere in public and I was acting up, they would say: "I have no problem spanking your bare bottom in front of all these people so if you don't want that to happen, stop." That shut me up pretty fast.
- muffie, on 04/07/2008, -0/+2That is, of course, untill the kid has the kahunas to call the parents bluff, then they have nothing
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -0/+5Exactly. It was a last resort, and the fear of it being a possibility worked the vast majority of the time.
- KingGorilla, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1 I was never spanked as a child and I knew my parents would never do that to me. I'm in college and I'm doing pretty decent as a human being
- danconia, on 04/07/2008, -2/+3LOL @ the same old "I came out good" cliche.
Seriously has there EVER been a point where someone said "well actually I came out ***** up but my brother has led a much better life than myself".
*yawn*
"Look at me I came out perfectly"... get over yourselves people. I was spanked plenty and excelled in sports, academics, and socially. But I'd be lying if I said I didn't have some left-over emotional problems from the spanking and, perhaps more importantly, the emotional motivation behind the desire of my mother to spank me. I can tell my brothers are a little bit ***** up from it too. For starters all of our self-esteem isn't where it *should* be (hint: higher). Insecurity is a bitch I wish I didn't have to deal with as much as I do.- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Sounds like your mother spanked often rather than as a last resort. And it sounds like she was emotionally motivated.
- keltin, on 04/07/2008, -0/+1...and it sounds like there may have been a lack of discussion between mom and kids to be sure they knew exactly why it was being used, and not just a power trippy thing of first resort.
- BlGBOSS, on 04/08/2008, -0/+0"I'd be lying if I said I didn't have some left-over emotional problems from the spanking"
pussy
- AriaStar, on 04/07/2008, -1/+1Sounds like your mother spanked often rather than as a last resort. And it sounds like she was emotionally motivated.
- ExitMoose, on 04/07/2008, -1/+0Spanking and physical punishment didn't seem to do such a good job in this family, did it?
- logandurand, on 04/07/2008, -1/+2Or, your parents had become dependent on beatings as a form of punishment, and when that was taken away from them, it became apparent that they had no responsibility having kids in the first place.
- Zarokima, on 04/07/2008, -4/+7I would have spanked the little ***** anyway if that's how he behaved. ***** the legality of it, if my children deserve a spanking they're damn well going to get it because I refuse to let them grow up doing whatever the hell they want with no consequences only to end up terrible people. It's not fair to the children to end up like that when all it would have taken to prevent it is a firm smack on the behind from the parents. That said, I agree it definitely shouldn't be the first choice, and if a child never needs a spanking then good for them, they're abnormally well-behaved.
- JimmySpaza, on 04/07/2008, -19/+18The bottom line is that par