Parent jailed for spanking child...

[texace]

This is old, I found the story in an old newspaper. (1997) I don't want to type the whole thing, but I'll summerize it.

        June 18, 1997 Laredo, Texas
       Woman Jailed for Child Abuse

Basically here's what happened. A child, 8 I believe, was playing with one of his friends in his front yard, his mother watching out the picture window. The little boy then hit his friend, knocking him to the ground and making him cry. The mother storms out of the house with a belt, whips the child 4 times, then sends him to his room, telling the friend to go home.

Now here's the kicker, a neighbor watering her lawn across the street saw this, and immediately called the police, and CPS. When they arrived, the neighbor accuse the mother of beating her child in broad daylight. The mother tried to explain she was disiplning her child, but to no avail. She was taken to court, and convicted of child abuse. She spent 2 weeks in jail (I think, not sure) and paid a fine.

How hokey is this? A parent goes to jail for spanking a child. This was 4 years ago, think about how it is now. I don't know about you, but I would have slapped the neighbor and told her to bug off.

<G> That's the way I was raised. My dad whipped me when I was little, and it does straighten kids up. But with the hokey laws out now, I don't think anyone can spank children anymore....

[ 07-02-2001: Message edited by: texace ]

[Sandman]

Corporal punishment is not the answer. It is absolutely not the be all end all solution to effective parenting.

Sure... I got whipped as a child also. I think we all turned out okay but I don't beat my children and I think they are far better behaved than my brother's kids. He whips his. Sure... I started out using corporal punishment. At first, it was simply to enforce fear in life-threatening situations such as running in the street or playing with light sockets. Later, I found that beating my kids didn't teach them as much as it allowed me to vent my own frustration. When I realized that, I stopped hitting my kids and you know what? They are turning out fine. They have no respect issues. They listen to their teachers. They don't fight at school and they behave in public.

If you have discipline problems, beating your kids won't make 'em better. Face it... if you whip your kids, it might not be phyical abuse, maybe just a parental swat but you are closer to abuse than a parent that does not use corporal punishment. "Gee, officer, I just meant to make him sit down. I don't know how it could have possibly dislocated his shoulder. yadda yadda yadda."

I see beating children as a weakness and a loss of control, especially when applied in public. Until one can master his or her own emotions, ineffective parenting and mis-behaved children are the result.

That applies to verbal abuse as well.

[ 07-02-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]

[mrfish]

i am glad my parents and teachers used corporal punishment and plan to continue the tradition regardless. period.

[Regular]

Hitting kids? Or Punching Kids?  

Spanking is the indeed right of parent of a spoiled brat. A few spanks and slaps on the butt make a child know they have to respect others. Abuse I do not stand for and so should any other American !!!  

null

[Regular]

Spanking should be done within the private envoirement of the parent and offspring. 'Whipping' is plain cruel.

[Animal]

When kids are not raised with a little spank now and then, they grow up to become a NathBDP

[StSanta]

Wrong Animal.

None of the kids in my family have ever been spanked. So far, we got my oldest brother who's got an Ma in math and physics and is a great father of three, my second older bro who's almost done with his Ma in computer science and my sis who's nearing the completion of her med studies.

And me, who's the black sheep of the family but still is a rather nice, if incredibly lazy, person  .

Showing a corrleation between not spanking and bad behaving kid will be quite hard, as will the opposite. There are many more variables involved in rearing a child.

It's clear that one can raise a good kid without the need of spanking. I was pretty horrible from time to time and did some amazingly stupid stunts, but my parents took the time to *talk* to me, and didn't choose the simple solution of a quick spanking, as if that'd teach me anything other than "might is right".

If "might is right" is the absolute base on which a parents authority is based, I say that speaks volumes about parenting skill.

You abuse a grown up - you go to jail. You abuse a kid - you go to jail. Treating the more defenseless differently and protecting them less against abuse is nonsensical to me.

Corporal punishment has been against the law for some time here, giving kids equal protection to adults in this sense.

Being the father or mother of a child does not give you privileges to hit it. instead one should consider how one would react if a) someone else did it to your child - some stranger or b) if someone bent you over their knees and started whooping your ass, how would you react?

Be consequent. Be decisive. Avoid the hypocritical approach.

[Sandman]

Santa... think I'm making a habit of agreeing with you.    

Oh... and spank, beat, whip, swat, hit, slap, whoop... I use the terms interchangeably. For some I guess these define the severity of the strike. I guess the difference is relative to the sting of your own hand.

I don't believe that corporal punishment in and of itself instills respect for parental authority. It instills fear of further spankings. It's not the same thing. If your kid doesn't respect you, no amount of beatings will change that.

How many of you actually have children? I have a 13 year old and a 10 year old.

[ 07-03-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]

[StSanta]

Sandman, I find your views highly agreeable as well  .

One thing that is VERY important to notice, and a thing that really I didn't get til my late teens is that there's a HUGE difference between RESPECT for a person or act and FEAR of the same.

Let me elucidate. It is about authority. According to the very non fine books I had to read about organisation theory, there are various forms authority can be based on, and there's also a difference between authority and being authoritarian.

A few examples on what authority can be based on: formal authority, i.e authority handed to someone by an organisation or group. This parents have by default.
Knowledge based authority, also something a parent SHOULD have  .
Charisma is another form and so forth.

Authority can also be seen in two forms, a rational and an "inhibitual" one.

With the rational form, the leader controls in such a fashion that the receiver can be allowed to see the rational side and accepts the authoirity based not only on formal, but also on charisma and knowledge.

The other uses power and threats.

Now, a child is not rational. But a child does have the capacity to understand basic causality. Once the child has done something deemed naughty by the authority, the approach should be to use rational authority and supplement by inhibitual (wrong word, cannot come up with the English term).

And there are other threats than that of physical violence, which essentially teaches that authority based on threats and physical violence supercedes authority based on anything else.

I am not sure I would want to teach my kid that.

[Thrawn]

Alot of parents don't have a consequence planned for a given behaviour, so they fall back on physical violence.  I think parents should have limits set and natural repercussions, that do not involve hitting thier child.  

Hitting your child will get them to stop what their doing, but the only thing they learn is that violence is okay.  Take the lady in the article.  She beats her kid for beating another kid??  What hypocracy!

[Ripsnort]

There is always a reason that CPS will take the child away, and not for simply spanking the kid.

~If the child shows previous or current 'marks' or 'deep bruises' from using a belt, then the child will be taken away.

Children do need discipline, but the amount you use, and when you use it is what determines the outcome of the unwanted behavior.  Once the child gets to a certain age, physical punishment can be harmful to the development.  Threat negotiation is much more effective, such as 'Your now grounded for pushing your friend to the ground, stay in your room the rest of the night.  This week you have lost priveleges to the television'.  8 years old is alittle too old IMO to be using a belt on any child. There are much more effective ways to get desired behaviorial results, and it begins with positive re-inforcement when the child is behaving well, thats the best preventive medicine for unwanted behavior.

As I said, if CPS took the child away, you're not getting the whole story, I'm sure the child had deep bruises, or marks left from the belt, which is an indication the too much force was used.

[Eagler]

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
As I said, if CPS took the child away, you're not getting the whole story, I'm sure the child had deep bruises, or marks left from the belt, which is an indication the too much force was used.

Gotta disagree with you there Rip, I'd think they'd side on the side of caution given the neighbors complaint and fear of not doing anything in response to the complaint just in case something happened in the future and the CPS is viewed as incompetent. This parents mistake was not giving her child the belt, but doing so in the front yard.
Tis another issue in today's society, treating children as adults and thinking talking/reasoning with a child will produce a well displined child. Not the case for all, some yes but not most. Just raises another spoiled brat who has their parents wrapped around their little finger. Nothing wrong with physical punishment in moderation. Saves alot of time and verbal energy. A small child is like a puppy in many ways. Positive reinforcement & love along with proper corrective measures will raise them both properly in most cases.

[StSanta]

Well said rip <S!>

[Gunthr]

I'm strongly against spanking kids... maybe a swat on the butt for a 3 year old putting something into an electrical outlet... or for running out into the street… but nothing more than that.

I think the Danes are enlightened on this issue, but I'm against making spankings against the law... beatings are already prohibited in the US. (And I'm against more laws and government intrusion in our lives.)

I just think using violence to "teach" your child, or punish your child is a mistake. It’s primitive. I totally reject the American sayings, “Spare the rod, spoil the child” and “Taught to the tune of a hickory stick.”  I doubt that spanking is as effective as reasoning and non-violent sanctions to correct the behavior of a child. I'm fully aware that there are some kids who do not respond to reasoning, but there are kids who aren't fazed by whippings either. What do you do with a kid like that? Whip them harder? Kill them? I'm exaggerating my point, but I certainly don't think violence is the answer. I think that any “hitting” behavior in a child should be dealt with swiftly and surely, but obviously NOT with a spanking. Reasoning and non-violent sanctions are the answer, with particularly painful ones reserved for “hitting”. Some examples of sanctions are loss of privileges, extra chores, etc.  

I think our jails are full of people that were taught violence by being spanked.  I don't agree with all the folklore that extols the virtue of corporal punishment for kids.

Gunthr
---------------------------------------------
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentium 4's"

[Gunthr]

[q]A small child is like a puppy in many ways. Positive reinforcement & love along with proper corrective measures will raise them both properly in most cases.[/q]

LOL, Eagler! Yeah, I can visualize you hitting a 4 month old child on the head with a rolled up newspaper and rubbing "it's" nose in a poopy diaper!