Pain in the Arse!

[Johan]

As in, "Ouch! That hurt!"

Man up on charges of child abuse for paddling his son. (http://portagedailyregister.com/news/49a11bd6-a139-11dd-840c-001cc4c03286.html)

The question of whether paddling a youngster is child abuse likely will be decided by a jury.

The child-abuse case involving a Poynette pastor who paddled his son hard enough to cause bruises as a form of discipline is headed for trial.

What a pile of fetid, stinking sewage; talk about a nanny state. It would be so much better for everyone if the government would raise all of our children. That way, nothing bad can happen to them. Ever. (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/06/03/florida.child.welfare/) Also, then parents can be relieved of any imposition upon their time or finances. :rolleyes:

Honestly...whether you believe in spankings/corporal punishment or not, I don't think it's anyone's business how someone raises their own kids, as long as those kids are clothed, educated, housed, fed, and have their basic needs met; especially if we're just talking a little bruising on the ass. How about convicting actual child molesters and putting them away, rather than parading political/social morality and opinions about how people should parent into courts of law? Our society has become full of wussies who want to invade others' homes and dictate how people can raise their own children and live their own lives. Ironic, considering how ill-equipped the state often is for the job; for ANY job, for that matter.

Bugger off, nanny state.

[Psykoboy2]

Had it done myself plenty as a kid.

[Gorvi]

Yes, to a point. There's never a reason to beat the shit out of your kids, but a spanking or smack on the hand when it's merited is something that should be done.

[Young Al Capone]

I cannot really say, as that is really up to the parent. I do, however, agree that it is no one's business how another raises thier child. So long as that parent never places thier child in danger (serious danger) than they are free to be the parent they choose.

I only had it happen to me once as a kid, and I deserved it.

[Shrinn]

Get out of my family, Nanny states.

[Schnoogs]

Kids need to be beaten

[Ancalagon]

I think their are two important facts to this debate:

1. Banning smacking wont do anything to prevent most forms of child abuse. Most child abuse will happen with disregard to the law. Its illegal to abuse a child right now, but it still happens. People that want to abuse their children wont care if a law says they arent allowed to, they will just threaten the kid into silence or find another way of not getting caught. It happens, it will always happen, the best thing you can do is provide support and education for parents to prevent them from becoming abusive, and catch those that do abuse their children.

2. Children need discipline in some form or fashion. Period. As I see it, they need to know to respect their parents. I'm not saying you need to smack every child, I think the punishment should fit the child as well as the crime. A child needs to know that his/her parents have authority, and sometimes a smack is the best way of reinforcing that. However, I dont believe its the only way, and would prefer to use it as a last resort (hell, no one wants to smack their children).

Note that I have no children, these are just my ramblings.

[Zrikz]

I voted for 9 and under, I mean I got smacked on the arse, and it was good... Well, it taught you not to do said action again usually.

If you haven't learned by 10+, well its probably too late and a lost cause ;p

[Camel]

I never thought that teachers should be allowed to hit kids until I became a teacher myself. :D

For the poll I picked "by parents" and "at any age." You could have already known this had we just said no to private polls!

[Reverant]

I think teachers need to be allowed to smack kids around, in all honesty. Some of them are real shits.

[Straximus]

Barnett struck hard enough to cause purplish bruises about four inches in width, the complaint stated.

That seems excessive to me.

I had my share of spankings as a kid, and never once walked away with any kind of bruise, let alone a purplish 4 incher. They still got the message across. I don't think I'd support a ban on corporal punishment, but I think most parents resort to it because they lack imagination. In most cases there's a more effective way to get the correct message across.

[TheEpicOfTyler]

I got the belt once.

I never stepped out of line again.

[Bingley Joe]

A parent should never hit their child, so I picked no.

But I certainly don't think it should take a law to make people understand that. Just don't hit your kids, fuckers.

[TheFlyingOrc]

A parent should never hit their child, so I picked no.

Why, exactly? Why should one of the most powerful negative reinforcers of negative behavior not be done?

[Nameless]

I'm against a corporal punishment ban, it should be up to the parents. It's not the government's business unless it goes into the realm of child abuse. I wouldn't use it on an older kid though, probably age 7 would be my limit, and even then, that's pushing it. But that's my own personal opinion, and nothing to be forced on others.

But honestly, how could they enforce a corporal punishment ban if it were passed? People rarely spank/slap their kids in public anymore. Even if it were illegal to do so, it seems like a practically unenforcable law.

[Lint of Death]

I'm no parent yet, but I feel like I should be able to communicate the importance of respecting me and obeying my rules without resorting to violence.

[Hyperglide]

When I was a kid and being a malcontent I used to get "the spoon." Well in all honesty I actually only got it a couple of times IIRC, but when my mom said "i'm gonna get the spoon," I almost wet myself, out of fear of reprisal alone I knew I was being 'bad.' I guess the wooden or plastic spoon is an equivalent to a paddle or belt and hurt just as much. It tought me outright not to be a mouthy little shit disturber. Taught me to be respectful, and knowing my place.

I didn't pay the bills, I didn't provided food, roof over my head, clothing, and other things kids take for granted (games, sports, tv, toys, etc.). Neither do other kids.

In this day and age where people are saying parenting today is bad and that people don't know how to parent their children I think that's only a half truth. If you can't rear your children today like I used to be or even farther back in history, then we are in for some rough times.

The punishment should fit the crime however. If you haven't also learned to smarten your act up by the time your 13-14 then pistol whips and severe beatings are in order.

Oh and I love my mom and she was single raising 4 of us and it's not easy. I respect what she did and looking back if I was her i'd do it the same.

[Arphahat]

Why, exactly? Why should one of the most powerful negative reinforcers of negative behavior not be done?

I disagree. The most powerful negative reinforcer is the "Naughty Step" or "timeout". Yeah, yeah, I know, it sounds like bullshit and thought so, too, but I changed my tune when I saw what a big fucking deal it was to my daughter when she first had to sit on it for two minutes. Holy god, you'd think that the world was ending. I almost think that she would have preferred a beating.

[Johan]

Time outs don't work with every kid, any more than spankings do. Every kid is different.

Why, exactly? Why should one of the most powerful negative reinforcers of negative behavior not be done?

Because bad behavior never has negative physical effects, that's why! Also, young children shouldn't be spanked when they reach for the stove, they should be allowed to learn through third-degree burns that obedience to mommy and daddy is a good idea! :D

That's why!

[Bingley Joe]

Why, exactly? Why should one of the most powerful negative reinforcers of negative behavior not be done?

Because it's simply not necessary.

Any adult should be able to communicate to a child the importance of obeying and respecting rules without the need to turn to physical violence, no matter how slight they deem that violence to be.

[Hyperglide]

Because it's simply not necessary.

Any adult should be able to communicate to a child the importance of obeying and respecting rules without the need to turn to physical violence, no matter how slight they deem that violence to be.

Case and point that it is necessary...

haSGAf7lvR0

[Vulture]

I'm no parent yet, but I feel like I should be able to communicate the importance of respecting me and obeying my rules without resorting to violence.

i have to say i held this belief up until the day i became a parent. the wife and i would have long debates about spanking, she was pro, i was against.

now, i found it really is necessary to give them a whack on the ass now and then, mostly when they are being super-disobedient (not listening to no). it seems to be in a child's nature to try hard to push their parents, just to see their boundaries, sometimes communication in the form of pain is the most direct way to get your point across, especially when it involves some sort of dangerous behavior.

that said, a 4 inch bruise on a kids ass is way excessive. i'm not sure if that constitutes child abuse, but shit, a 4 inch "bruise" from a spank is one hell of a forceful spank, that seems unnecessary. you don't want to cripple them with punishment you only want them to go "fuck that hurt, i'm not doing that again," and not "holy shit! daddy is insane and will kill me!"

[Bingley Joe]

Case and point that it is necessary...

LOL! No. Tempting as a good bludgeoning might be, that's just case in point that no matter what, some people are simply not equipped to be parents.


.. I want some chocolate milk now ;)

[Kelegacy]

I believe in reasonable ass-slapping. It's not abuse, and much different than beating your kid.

[pomeroy]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/96/249941924_66a0aec8f7.jpg

I'm surprised that this hasn't been posted yet.

[Hemalin]

...especially if we're just talking a little bruising on the ass.
Where do you draw the line? Is there a limit to the size of the bruise? Does it matter where on the body? Is a little black eye acceptable?

Edit: I'm actually asking this to anyone that cares to answer, not just Johan.

[LongStepMantis]

Absolutely.

Always keeping in mind that child abuse and corporal punishment are not one and the same. A short paddling for a major offense can help reinforce the idea that they should never do such a thing again.

Beating, punching, even verbally degrading a kid is not the same thing.

My dad used to spank me when I did stupid shit as a kid. But he always did so without anger, and afterwards he would very calmly explain what was wrong with what I had done and tell me to never do it again. I would never do it again. It wasn't even the physical punishment that dissuaded me, it was that I then knew just how serious he was, and it sunk in.

[walkstheplanes]

Sure, paddling is fine, but enough to cause 4 inch bruises? Isn't that a little excessive?

[Shadowstorm]

Because it's simply not necessary.

Any adult should be able to communicate to a child the importance of obeying and respecting rules without the need to turn to physical violence, no matter how slight they deem that violence to be.

:/

There is a reason spanking exists. It's a teaching tool. To say spanking is not necessary (sometimes) is a ridiculous notion, in my humble opinion.

[Johan]

Anybody with children knows you do not reason with a two-year-old who pulls hair or bites. Want it to stop? When they pull hair, pull theirs back immediately...or give them a flick on the forearm. If the kid bites, you give 'em a swat. Guess what? IT STOPS!

You don't reason with a little kid about such things any more than you would explain to them that fire is hot while you watch them stick their hand in it.

Where do you draw the line?

I draw it around the borders of my property.

[Hemalin]

Surely you don't find cigar burns and broken noses to be acceptable forms of punishment do you?

[Johan]

Surely you don't find cigar burns and broken noses to be acceptable forms of punishment do you?

Surely you don't find it necessary to ask ridiculous questions, do you?

Do you find rape an acceptable form of sexual interaction? Yeah...great question there, Hemalin! :rolleyes:

[Bingley Joe]

:/

There is a reason spanking exists. It's a teaching tool. To say spanking is not necessary (sometimes) is a ridiculous notion, in my humble opinion.

Well in my humble opinion, the notion that an adult is incapable of teaching a child a lesson without hitting them is what's ridiculous.

Does it work? Yes.

Is it necessary? No.

[Generation ABXY]

Obviously I wouldn't want you to punish them for something silly - like say, spilling something (which I've seen happen) - or be too excessive in it - like Hemalin's posed cigar burns - but, yeah, to an extent I think it should be allowed by the parents (though not by a school and that sort of thing). Also, I'd hope you would exhaust other means first, but, as Johan pointed out, there certainly comes a point when you have to do it.

[Johan]

Well in my humble opinion, the notion that an adult is incapable of teaching a child a lesson without hitting them is what's ridiculous.

Do you have kids?

You can't teach a one or two-year-old a lesson about biting others by reasoning with them. It can't be done. Their brains aren't formed for that kind of information processing. Even teenagers' brains (the area that inhibits risky behavior (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52687-2005Jan31.html)) isn't fully formed yet.

There's a reason you'll see some parents with their toddlers on those ridiculous-looking "leashes" that attach to the wrist or torso...little kids can't be expected to reason or respond to verbal reasoning.

[Hemalin]

Surely you don't find it necessary to ask ridiculous questions, do you?

Do you find rape an acceptable form of sexual interaction? Yeah...great question there, Hemalin! :rolleyes:

You didn't exactly answer my question. You find bruises and hair pulling to be acceptable. Is giving a child a black eye ok in the name of teaching a child? Is it ok to break the skin and draw blood? Your response of "I draw the line around the borders of my property." seems to allow for some pretty harsh punishment.

[Xerxes]

Kids need to be beaten

Disciplined, yes. Beaten, no. This isn't MMA. :p

Look, I never had a whipping last long than 2 minutes. Not that I can think of. Hell, by the third belt lash/syllable, my ass got the message. You also got to strike fast. When kids touch something hot they get the message. You spank when they doing wrong they'll get it.

Also, kids should be allowed to cry for free. If nothing sad happen you better be smiling. Or at least complacent.

[LongStepMantis]

Case and point that it is necessary...

haSGAf7lvR0

In my parent's house, right after his first screaming fit, all you would have heard is him being dragged away and a belt coming off. And it's deserved.

The main problem, like in this case, is that the kid should have had these lessons earlier in life. Almost all of the dumb shit I did that got me spanked was when I was 4-10 years old. If they can get away with acting like that into their teens, its officially the parents' failure to establish boundaries, and they've let the kid start walking all over them.

Like this kid. He tells his mom she's a liar and he wants some "motherfuckin" chocolate milk. Yeah...not punishing him seems to be working out for them.

To anyone who had their parents physically punish them...tell me these words didn't make you reflect more than any others after you got in trouble:
"Not as sorry as you're gonna be when your Father gets home."

[Arphahat]

Do you have kids?

You can't teach a one or two-year-old a lesson about biting others by reasoning with them. It can't be done. Their brains aren't formed for that kind of information processing. Even teenagers' brains (the area that inhibits risky behavior (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52687-2005Jan31.html)) isn't fully formed yet.

There's a reason you'll see some parents with their toddlers on those ridiculous-looking "leashes" that attach to the wrist or torso...little kids can't be expected to reason or respond to verbal reasoning.

Really, as long as you are diligent about using it, "the Naw-ty Step" works for everything, including biting. We have been using it since my daughter was two and barely need to use it now that she is five.

I've tried spankings, too, and they only made me feel better, but it never really helped her.

[Johan]

You find bruises and hair pulling to be acceptable.

I don't find bruises acceptable. I also don't find charging a parent with a criminal offense for ass-bruises acceptable, at all. The government KILLS people and nobody gets charged. This guy faces a criminal trial for a bruise on his kid's ass? Ridiculous.

Is giving a child a black eye ok in the name of teaching a child? Is it ok to break the skin and draw blood?

Both are ridiculous on their face.

Your response of "I draw the line around the borders of my property." seems to allow for some pretty harsh punishment.

No, it doesn't. It keeps the fucking government out of my hair. They're not paying for my kids or raising them, and they damn well ought to stay out my family's business unless they have substantial evidence of imminent danger to a child...which will only happen in my household if one of my kids hurts themselves by not listening to me and grabbing a hot pan, or jumping down the stairs head first, or chewing on a steak knife...:D

[Schnoogs]

Surely you don't find it necessary to ask ridiculous questions, do you?

Do you find rape an acceptable form of sexual interaction? Yeah...great question there, Hemalin! :rolleyes:

Johan is on a roll in this thread! I mean that in a good way!

[Xerxes]

My aunt had this other form a punishment that seemed to work pretty good. Having my cousins kneel in rice.

[Psykoboy2]

I keep reading the thread title as "Palin in the Arse!"

[LongStepMantis]

My aunt had this other form a punishment that seemed to work pretty good. Having my cousins kneel in rice.

Cooked or uncooked? ;)

[AbeLincoln]

Some others have said it but yeah. There's 2 important things that separate abuse from discipline.

1. Must be done without anger.
2. Child must know why the punishment is being inflicted.

This is how it worked in my house when I was a kid. I got hit till I was crying hard, but after I'd get hugged told they loved me, and then got told exactly why what I did was wrong and why I needed to not do it in the future.

Another thing that helped associate greater misbehavior with greater punishment was, first the warning "stop that" followed by counting, the counting was the number of whacks you were gonna get so it was in your best interest to stop quickly.

Also this isn't to say we never had time-outs or toys taken away or anything. The most creative one I remember was if you slammed your door you had to open and close it quietly 100times.

[Johan]

I keep reading the thread title as "Palin in the Arse!"

I'm not that clever; that would have been good. :)

[LongStepMantis]

Some others have said it but yeah. There's 2 important things that separate abuse from discipline.

1. Must be done without anger.
2. Child must know why the punishment is being inflicted.

This is how it worked in my house when I was a kid. I got hit till I was crying hard, but after I'd get hugged told they loved me, and then got told exactly why what I did was wrong and why I needed to not do it in the future.

Another thing that helped associate greater misbehavior with greater punishment was, first the warning "stop that" followed by counting, the counting was the number of whacks you were gonna get so it was in your best interest to stop quickly.

See, that's exactly what I've been saying. The end result is that you fear the anger of your parent(s), but you don't fear them. I never once was punished where I felt afraid of my father. I was just afraid to do the stupid shit that would make him do it again. Big difference.

He always hugged me afterwards, and I always understood "He's doing this because I made him do it."

[Schnoogs]

Some others have said it but yeah. There's 2 important things that separate abuse from discipline.

1. Must be done without anger.
2. Child must know why the punishment is being inflicted.

1. Enjoyment is definitely not anger
2. I'll make sure to point out the reason to them by repeatedly reminding them that they are worthless and no good and therefore deserve a good beating

:p

[AbeLincoln]

Ok, let's turn the tables. So, time outs and communication are so great, you're not hitting the kid after all, so let's lock them in a dark room for 2 days with a continuous loop of your explanation why they shouldn't do it plays. Violence avoided hooray!!

See this is not the same thing as a timeout in the same way that verbal denigration and excessive wrong minded violence (seriously? cigar burns?) are not the same thing as corporal punishment. Any disciplinary tool in the wrong hands will be excessive and damaging.

[Haywud]

I voted for yes and any age.
As Johan said, sometimes timeout and reasoning is not what is needed. You need something to show the child that what they are doing is not desired. I got my ass beat plenty as a kid. When I got too big to spank, I got slapped in the mouth for talking back to my mom. That was as old as 13 or 14. But guess what, I stopped talking back to my mom.

However you want to discipline your child is your decision, but you can bet your ass my kid is going to get spanked the day that he is old enough to warrant it.

Also, as stated, there is a big difference between corporal punishment and abuse. Asking where someone draws the line is a question that to me is meant to draw whoever answers it into an argument and away from the discussion that could fully be possible between intelligent people that have opinions about a specific topic.

Of course all of that is just my opinion.

[JRR006]

Parents should be able to physically discipline their children. I stopped short of voting for teachers. There are some teachers I've had that I wouldn't want to give the authority to physically discipline my child, and there are some I'd be comfortable allowing to do so. All the nuns I had in gradeschool, for example! Nuns should be allowed to strike any child they wish. Even if they're just at the grocery store or whatever.

As for age... I have no opinion. It seems like it should stop once your child has gained some moral understanding (teenagers), but at the same time, that's the group I think most often needs a slap to keep in line.

[maharahaj]

Kids need to be beaten

Agreed. It kept me in line as a kid. I feared my parents and turned out perfectly fine.

[pomeroy]

It's very odd to me that people in this thread are automatically linking spanking with child abuse. They aren't the same thing, and after seeing some of my friends' children are turning out with no spankings ever...I will probably spank my (eventual) children. I don't think spankings need to be used for everything (and they're pretty worthless without explanations/understanding for the child), but come on, people.

[Xerxes]

Cooked or uncooked? ;)

Nice hard uncooked rice. After it started to dig in on them they were kneeling there all wet in the face from tears. No loud crying or nothing.

[alienmastermind]

Because it's simply not necessary.

Any adult should be able to communicate to a child the importance of obeying and respecting rules without the need to turn to physical violence, no matter how slight they deem that violence to be.

Example: Lil' Sarah is going to touch the pretty red circles on the stove.

'Now, Sarah, I need you to understand that the stove is very hot, and will burn you. Stop eating that piece of lint from the floor and listen to me, child! We're having a serious discussion here--did...did you just defecate in your pants? Have you no self control?!'

or

Smack! NO! Don't touch! Hot!

Expedience of message over intelligent discourse. Am I saying have an old school pier sixer with your child? No. But a swat on the Pampers is loud, psychologically shocking, and an attention getter. When you treat adolescents and toddlers like adults, they begin thinking they should be afforded the same respect as an adult when it comes to being disciplined.

Which is why you get kids who act like this:

blU_FlICcog

Getting physical with your child, i.e. spanking, is a way to establish the hierarchy in a household. Smacking a child on the hand is a way a nonverbal toddler will understand and equate both the 'negative sounding words' with 'negative results'. It should be the 'nuclear' option in your bringing up of the child. It should also be done with dispassion, so that they understand that punishments elevate as behavior degenerates.

It's how I was raised, and I understand why it's important to use that kind of force to establish respect. Without that, what can you do to a child that establishes dominion in your own home? How much talking would work on the example above?

[Arphahat]

I would like to suggest that everyone refrain from hyperbole. The examples being used by both sides are simply weak, strawmen arguments; there is no purpose to continuing.

For example, not to pick on alienmastermind, but his is the last post while I type this, not spanking does not mean you cannot grab your child away from the stove. Another example is that spanking != beating / cigarette burns / getting thrown down the stairs.

Please, we can make our points without being silly. I hope this doesn't upset any of you; I'm just trying to be the voice of reason.

Also, there are two separate subjects suggested by this opening post. Law against spanking and personal opinions about child rearing. The poll doesn't allow for the distinction. For instance, I do not think that there is a need for a law against spanking, since current laws should suffice for those who go over-the-line, but I also don't advocate the use of spankings since I see them as unnecessary.

[Schnoogs]

Slight change of subject...here's an example of a parent that needs a beatdown...who the fuck would let their 8 year old kid try this (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/27/boy.shoots.himself.ap/index.html).

[Xerxes]

Slight change of subject...here's an example of a parent that needs a beatdown...who the fuck would let their 8 year old kid try this (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/27/boy.shoots.himself.ap/index.html).

I would say something about needing gun laws preventing kids to shoot firearms, but that's absurd. :rolleyes:

[Scaryfaced]

I was raised in a family that didn't spank. That's probably a rarity on these boards, it seems, but my parents didn't believe in physical punishment. I say my parents, but really it was my Mom. She was a child psych major in college and I think it gave her the background to try a different approach to raising a child. Guess what! I never became a problem child. I didn't talk back, I didn't act like the kids in the videos, nothing like that. Generally, I was and always have been a well behaved person. Still, I'm not about to try and convince myself that it's an approach that would work with all children. The reality of the matter is that NO approach will work with ALL children. Its situational. Not to mention this was an approach made by a child psychologist, so it's really not something you can apply to all families.

However, I'm not a good example of average children. I ended up hurting myself constantly, mostly because I'm accident prone, but my Mom let me learn from my mistakes. I touched an iron as a toddler and recieved 2nd and 3rd degree burns in the palm of my hand. I got in a sand throwing fight and got sand embedded under my eye lid, which scratched my cornia. I've probably had over 300 stitches over the course of my life. That tought me not to do stupid shit, but it was almost always backed up by some sort of physical pain. I learned from my mistakes, but my mistakes didn't require an ass beating. I was usually beat up enough already.

Now this might come as a suprise, but I voted that physical punishment is A-ok. While I never was spanked myself, I can't think of a situation in which I deserved it. I got a good firm disappointment speach, which honestly, for me, is much worse. After about an hour of psycho babble, you'd rather just get smacked and get it over with. To me, certain kids in certain situations need some damned discipline. I sware if I see another mouthy 12 year old and a mother trying to reason with them, I'm going to slap that kid. At a certain point, kids just plain need negative feedback for the idiotic stuff they do. If they aren't getting it from their environment, it's your job as a parent to impress upon them the error of their ways. If that involves a spanking or two, so be it.
________
PORNSTARS CLEO (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/857/cleo/videos/1)

[Schnoogs]

I would say something about needing gun laws preventing kids to shoot firearms, but that's absurd. :rolleyes:

Yeah...personal responsibility is so overrated...if you pass enough laws your populace doesn't even have to think anymore :rolleyes:

[Xerxes]

Yeah...personal responsibility is so overrated...if you pass enough laws your populace doesn't even have to think anymore :rolleyes:

Nope. I'm just saying kids don't need no fucking gun. Well if we can stop them from shooting themselves in the head why stop them from getting drunk. :rolleyes:

[Generation ABXY]

Nope. I'm just saying kids don't need no fucking gun. Well if we can stop them from shooting themselves in the head why stop them from getting drunk. :rolleyes:

Well, technically the kid didn't own the gun (at least, the way I read the story...but I could have missed something), he was just trying one out at a gun show. On the whole, however, I would say, yeah, don't take children to those things; you're just asking for something to go wrong.

[Xerxes]

Well, technically the kid didn't own the gun (at least, the way I read the story...but I could have missed something), he was just trying one out at a gun show. On the whole, however, I would say, yeah, don't take children to those things; you're just asking for something to go wrong.

No but he is eight shooting a gun!!! This isn't Burma.

[Generation ABXY]

No but he is eight shooting a gun!!! This isn't Burma.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't really think he should have been there either. And, had he been there to pick out a firearm, I would certainly agree that he is too young to own one. Hell, I don't even think I owned a BB gun until I was like 10 or 12.

[Xerxes]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I don't really think he should have been there either. And, had he been there to pick out a firearm, I would certainly agree that he is too young to own one. Hell, I don't even think I owned a BB gun until I was like 10 or 12.

Don't get me wrong I know some kids get taught hunting at a young age, but I mean if you smoke or drink, why are you even holding a gun. In a public event at that.

And you say an eight year old couldn't handle a uzi?! Tell me more.

[Whunpo]

I've never been beaten. My parents have always felt it was wrong. However, I think that I am a very good kid. I do not break rules very often, I respect my parents (Hell, I consider my dad to be a great friend of mine), and I think I turned out pretty well. I don't think that physical violence is the way to teach kids to behave. It may work, but I think that it is the vast minority of kids who require violence to teach them to act right. And if violence is required, I'm guessing that the parents have done something themselves to cause it.

[Generation ABXY]

Don't get me wrong I know some kids get taught hunting at a young age, but I mean if you smoke or drink, why are you even holding a gun. In a public at that. And eight year old couldn't handle a uzi? Tell me more.

...I think it is getting to be too late here - I’m only understanding half of what you’re saying at the moment. That said, I’ll try to continue on tomorrow, if anyone’s still interested in discussing that aspect (even if it is a bit off topic). :D

[Xerxes]

...I think it is getting to be too late here - I’m only understanding half of what you’re saying at the moment. That said, I’ll try to continue on tomorrow, if anyone’s still interested in discussing that aspect (even if it is a bit off topic). :D

Yeah, it got bad towards the end there. I tried to clarify. :(

[Bingley Joe]

It's late, I'm tired, and there's FC2 to play, but it seems as though - in general - those of us who weren't spanked see no reason why a child cannot be raised without the need for parents to hit their children, while those who have been spanked feel it is the most direct tool a parent has for making their children understand what they expect from them.

Plenty of studies would show that this is exactly what should be expected.

Meanwhile, I think this discussion demonstrates that - in general - we are all fairly well adjusted individuals capable of behaving like adults and respecting one another in spite of differences of opinion on this subject..

Some might even go so far as to call us 'well brought up.' (whatever happened to Civil to make him post those cosplay pics not withstanding :p)


.. funny how that works ;)

[Lint of Death]

Plenty of studies would show that this is exactly what should be expected.

Meanwhile, I think this discussion demonstrates that - in general - we are all fairly well adjusted individuals capable of behaving like adults and respecting one another in spite of differences of opinion on this subject..

There's also the study about how kids who are spanked often develop a bonus kink for spanking during sex.

So, yeah, no to spanking. It's harder to sleep at night with noisy neighbors.

[Johan]

Meanwhile, I think this discussion demonstrates that - in general - we are all fairly well adjusted individuals capable of behaving like adults and respecting one another in spite of differences of opinion on this subject.

Actually, what it proves is that, if you have a different opinion from the authorities, you'll be charged with a criminal offense. For bruises on your kids ass.

There's no "discussion" about that. That's a reality, and a ridiculous one, too.

There's also the study about how kids who are spanked often develop a bonus kink for spanking during sex.

Probably a Kinsey study, eh? ;)

He took data from pedophiles, knowing what they were doing all the while, and reported as reliable data from volunteers, which is statistically and scientifically ridiculous on its face because the sample isn't randomized nor does it offer any insight into the general population.

He was a fuckup! :)

[Bingley Joe]

Actually, what it proves is that, if you have a different opinion from the authorities, you'll be charged with a criminal offense. For bruises on your kids ass.


No, that's what your article proves. And people who bruise their kids should be charged with abuse.

This discussion is actually quite separate from that, however; the majority of the people who have expressed an opinion in this thread agree that bruising kids is taking things too far.

[Lint of Death]

Probably a Kinsey study, eh? ;)

Nope, not at all. (http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-02-27-spanking_N.htm)

[rifter]

Parents should have the option to spank, and parents should give teachers the permission to, as well.

The problem, I see, is this pastor left BRUISES on his child... that is pretty damn excessive.

[A. S. Houdini]

(I'm long time lurker, came over here from EvAv after the whole... well... thing)


Probably a Kinsey study, eh? ;)

He took data from pedophiles, knowing what they were doing all the while, and reported as reliable data from volunteers, which is statistically and scientifically ridiculous on its face because the sample isn't randomized nor does it offer any insight into the general population.

He was a fuckup! :)

I think we ought to cut the man some slack! All this is true, but he was one of the pioneers of the scientific study of sex which I'm sure is something we can agree is important. He came a full 20 years before Masters and Johnson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masters_and_Johnson) study of basic human anatomical function during sex.(Says the biology major...)

And actually, according to wikipedia (not the most reliable source, I know), the differences after people like pedophiles and prison inmates are removed are not significant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports#Objections_to_Methodology).

Also, compare to Aristotle. He was wrong about nearly everything scientific he said (things move in straight lines on earth and circles in the heavens, plants get their mass from the ground, objects of differing mass fall with differing acceleration, etc), but he was pretty important to science, in his own way. Anyway, I think he deserves some credit for being ballsy enough to attempt to study in a (pseudo?)scientific fashion.

[Bingley Joe]

Leave Kinsey out of this. He's irrelevant here.

[Vulture]

And if violence is required, I'm guessing that the parents have done something themselves to cause it.
thats terribly unfair.

this kind of reminds me of something an elderly friend of mine said: "there is no proper way to bring up a kid with Irish blood that doesn't involve a whoopin'

although it is untrue, it does illustrate the point that some kids really do require negative reinforcement, and it is largely due to the kid's temperament and really has little to do with upbringing at least for very young kids.

the first time i spanked my kid, he was just about 2 years old and we were in a restaurant. we were ordering when my son just started to scream as loud as he could, for no other reason than it probably sounded/felt good to do so and it visibly aggravated everyone around him. i attempted to get him to stop using my normal parenting tricks which is saying hey! stop! and clapping my hands to get his attention. it was ineffective and he ignored me and continued to scream. i got more stern, and covered his mouth with two fingers and he still persisted, this was about 2 minutes now of extreme screaming. there was no way of getting through to him, he was going to scream if he wanted to no matter what i said to him. i took him out of his seat and brought him to the car where i whacked him twice on his diaper butt (not even very hard) and told him firmly NO! YOU DO NOT SCREAM! he cried, i felt bad.

the second or third time i spanked, we were getting out of the car in the mall parking lot, he was not sitting still and wanted to run. i was holding his hand tight in my hand to prevent him from screaming off full tilt across the parking lot like a wild dog. he was pulling on my hand with all his weight yelling "no daddy, no! stuck hand!" while i was trying to get out the stroller form the car. he broke from my hand and started to tear ass, i caught up with him and immediately whacked his ass, just hard enough to get my point across.

each of the examples above were the LAST time he's exhibited such defiant, dangerous or disruptive behavior. i never have to spank my kid now. the last time i've spanked him was probably 6 months ago. he listens to what i have to say. he understands 'no' now, and understands that his parent's rules are there to protect him. he is not afraid of me or hates me, none of that.

that's just my kid. family friends we know have different types of kids that require different parenting techniques, some kids really don't need to be disciplined with a hand, other kids really do need strict enforcement to keep them safe. only a child's parent knows the best way to discipline their own kids if they:
1. don't discipline out of anger
2. stay consistent
3. be kind, not cruel

i don't see what the problem is with this.

[Whunpo]

Text
I don't know if I would really put that under my definition of physical punishment. While it was technically "physical", the main purpose of swatting him was to get his attention, not to inflict pain (which is what I view as the goal of spanking). The process of teaching kids through pain is what I view as immoral and avoidable.

[carnage11]

I am a strong believer in spankings, however, I believe it should be controlled and never done while angry. If you leave a mark you've spanked too hard. Many times, it's not even the actual spanking but the time leading up to it that's the worst. So give yourself some time to calm down and then spank. Kinda like the ol' Mom telling you to 'wait until your father gets home' routine. Oh noes! Most times Mom forgot by the time Dad got home so it was all good, but the dread of waiting was killer.

Now if we're talking, walking out to the front yard to grab a hickory stick and whippin' the kid like Kunta Kinte, well that's just wrong.

As far as age goes, well the kid should be old enough to understand why they're getting punished. I'd say 4 is a good age to start. There's always the "time out chair" option, which sucks especially for older kids (10+). It's a good idea to put the chair near a clock so they can see how long they've sat. 5 minutes staring at a clock is a freakin' lifetime to a kid. Especially when their friends are waiting outside.:D

[Hemalin]

Asking where someone draws the line is a question that to me is meant to draw whoever answers it into an argument and away from the discussion that could fully be possible between intelligent people that have opinions about a specific topic.
How so? The entire discussion in regards to corporal punishment is where the line between punishment and abuse stands. Some people believe you shouldn't lay your hand on your child, others believe your kid should be cowering in the corner when you come home. From the article, the state seems to believe that leaving bruises is considered abuse. If people don't believe the state should step in at that point, it is reasonable to ask them at what point the state should step in.

[Johan]

I think we ought to cut the man some slack!

Kinsey took data from known pedophiles, as they were abusing children sexually and otherwise, and he is lauded by some in the academic community and never went to jail. (and volunteer data is shit).

The father being discussed in this thread may go to jail for bruises on his kid's ass.

Yeah...that makes sense. The father should just publish his findings in an academic journal; then he'll receive praise and PHAT LOOTZ!

[Johan]

And people who bruise their kids should be charged with abuse.

Must be nice to have things so...shall we say...black and white (partial pun intended) in your world. Keeps things nice and tidy.

Lock the sucker up! He obviously abuses his kids! :rolleyes:

[MrBeowulfe]

I got paddled plenty as a kid. Earned every one too. Never left a bruise though. That being said...f'in government needs to butt the hell out.

[Shadowstorm]

I got paddled plenty as a kid. Earned every one too. Never left a bruise though. That being said...f'in government needs to butt the hell out.

I second this.

[Crowe]

Slight change of subject...here's an example of a parent that needs a beatdown...who the fuck would let their 8 year old kid try this (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/27/boy.shoots.himself.ap/index.html).

A fucking UZI. You have to be kidding me, a hand gun is pretty bad but a lot safer than a god damn UZI. This is mind blowing.

[TrackZero]

What a pile of fetid, stinking sewage; talk about a nanny state. It would be so much better for everyone if the government would raise all of our children. That way, nothing bad can happen to them. Ever. (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/06/03/florida.child.welfare/) Also, then parents can be relieved of any imposition upon their time or finances. :rolleyes:

Honestly...whether you believe in spankings/corporal punishment or not, I don't think it's anyone's business how someone raises their own kids, as long as those kids are clothed, educated, housed, fed, and have their basic needs met; especially if we're just talking a little bruising on the ass. How about convicting actual child molesters and putting them away, rather than parading political/social morality and opinions about how people should parent into courts of law? Our society has become full of wussies who want to invade others' homes and dictate how people can raise their own children and live their own lives. Ironic, considering how ill-equipped the state often is for the job; for ANY job, for that matter.

Bugger off, nanny state.

Hrm. Well, considering studies showing that physical punishment is effective up until the age of ~11-13+, it seems silly for anyone to speak against it before that age. So long as it's not flat-out abuse. (The study had noted that the human brain, when it's young enough isn't developed properly and responds as animals do to physical pain to learning, and vice versa once it matures enough at just before puberty, where physical punishment has the opposite effect you'd want.)

So with the stipulation that the child is still young and the punishment is only being used when necessary, I'm fine with that. Though I'd balance it out at the same time and note that I've seen plenty of times where it's just bad parenting and used when it shouldn't be (and also bad parenting when people try to "talk" to their kids when they're far to young to process that properly and it only results in worse behavior down the road, fuck you barney the dinosaur).

[Bingley Joe]

Must be nice to have things so...shall we say...black and white (partial pun intended) in your world. Keeps things nice and tidy.

The guy used a stick to hit his child. Hell yeah it's black and white to me -- this is NOT the same thing as giving the child a corrective smack on the butt with your hand, it is hitting them with a stick and bruising them.

It is not OK to hit a child with a fucking stick and bruise them, Johan.

It makes me sad to think that you'd even contemplate supporting this guy. :(

[QueQueg]

Your poll is flawed.

I don't think that corporal punishment is necessary, and I don't think it's as effective as dissapproval (we're talking young kids here.) Also, I think it encourages violence in children. If you get angry with your kid, and smack them, what are they going to do when a classmate takes their ball away on the playground? Smack them. And then get smacked in return as punishment? Silly.

However, I also don't think the state should be legislating how to parent. If you want to be a bad parent (strictly my opinion) and use physical punishment to train your child, as long as it's not excessive, the state has no right to tell you what to do.

[anakin876]

I've never been beaten. My parents have always felt it was wrong. However, I think that I am a very good kid. I do not break rules very often, I respect my parents (Hell, I consider my dad to be a great friend of mine)

You may not understand what respect means. If you are now an adult and consider your father to be a friend - then never mind. If you are teenager (or even younger) your parents should probably be in a different class outside of "friend." If you respect your parents and friends equally - and if your parents treat you as a friend (instead of as a child that needs to learn how to be an adult) - then you don't really have the parent you need.

Obviously I don't know your whole situation, and you may have meant that you respect your father and that you don't fear him and are on good terms with him. However, I run into a lot of adults who forget that that they are supposed to be parents first. I also run into a lot of kids who seem to think that their parents have the "responsibility" to be their friends, give them whatever they want, and to never say "no." In these situations the people who are "friends" with their children end up screwing those kids up - sometimes permanently. The kid goes through life believing they are entitled to whatever they want whenever they want it - which makes work and BEING A PARENT rather difficult.

[Khrymsyn]

To gather attention, to show disprovement, and to make your point to a child, physical punishment is ok.

To inflict pain? That's not ok.

Big difference between getting slapped on the rear, and getting a wire hangar across the back. Kids need guidance and structure, and those are two things parents seem to be having more and more difficulty providing, as thier own parents are often of a generation that was getting away from guidance and structure. Sometimes I just feel like we're raising a bunch of kids that don't understand appropriate boundries, or how to conquer boundries with hard work and perservering through failures.

[Slack3r78]

There's a reason you'll see some parents with their toddlers on those ridiculous-looking "leashes" that attach to the wrist or torso...little kids can't be expected to reason or respond to verbal reasoning.
I've been told my mother gave up on those with me as I just saw the increasingly complex harnesses she'd find at the stores as more intriguing challenges to Houdini my way out of. :)

[Slack3r78]

It is not OK to hit a child with a fucking stick and bruise them, Johan.
A paddle isn't a stick.

Also, using a switch to dole out punishment was pretty much the norm back in the day. My mother used to tell me about her grandmother making her and her brother go out and find their own switch when they got in trouble as children.

[Slack3r78]

I keep reading the thread title as "Palin in the Arse!"
Don't be ridiculous. She wouldn't have five kids were that the case.

[Young Al Capone]

Also, using a switch to dole out punishment was pretty much the norm back in the day. My mother used to tell me about her grandmother making her and her brother go out and find their own switch when they got in trouble as children.

Yeah, my parents used to have to get thier own one as well. Plus, it couldn't be a little puss switch, or the parent would send them back out to get a good one and that guarenteed a few more lashings. I am glad I wasn't a kid back in the day, sounds wack.

[Slack3r78]

Yeah, my parents used to have to get thier own one as well. Plus, it couldn't be a little puss switch, or the parent would send them back out to get a good one and that guarenteed a few more lashings.
Same thing. Also been told that big sticks were actually preferable because little thin ones actually stung more.

[Johan]

The guy used a stick to hit his child.

No, he didn't. Get the facts right.

Hell yeah it's black and white to me -- this is NOT the same thing as giving the child a corrective smack on the butt with your hand, it is hitting them with a stick and bruising them.

Now I know for a fact you have no idea what you're talking about. Parents who use corporal punishment properly do NOT use their hands or other body parts to smack their child around. Properly administered corporal punishment is calm, corrective/explanatory, measured, and with a paddle or switch of some innocuous sort.

It is not OK to hit a child with a fucking stick and bruise them, Johan.

HYPERBOLE! It wasn't/isn't a STICK, and the ass bruises easily. Very easily.

It makes me sad to think that you'd even contemplate supporting this guy. :(

It makes me angry that you would inject yourself into the lives and homes of others to force moral compliance with your edict on how to correct/train children.

Your poll is flawed.

Every poll is flawed. There are always error rates, limitations (because you have to make actual choices, therefore there have to be choices to make, therefore some choices must be left out), sampling is skewed if it's a volunteer sample as this is, and on and on...

[A. S. Houdini]

The father being discussed in this thread may go to jail for bruises on his kid's ass.

I agree with you, that's bullshit. But the two arguments aren't connected, except insofar as they both have to do with how you define child abuse.


(and volunteer data is shit).

There's no other kind. You can't force people to participate in research. Well, I suppose you could, but I think we can agree that we shouldn't.

Kinsey took data from known pedophiles, as they were abusing children sexually and otherwise

Maybe I misunderstand, but they weren't present (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1374/is_n5_v56/ai_18640605/pg_2?tag=artBody;col1)as the pedophiles were... pedophiling.

But look, if you want to make the argument that he should have been locked up for not reporting the pedophiles' identity to the authorities, I can see where you're coming from. It's not like that the data he gleaned from the pedophiles--used for showing that pre-pubertal children can orgasm--was even necessary (he had enough data from peoples' childhood recollections already). I just think it's inconsistent to not recognize his contributions along with is failures.

And like Bingly Joe said, it's not actually relevant to the topic... so, uh, I guess I fail on my first post... :(

EDIT: Now that I think about it, my second one too... Crap.

[Arphahat]

I searched on the "Barry W. Barnett" and found an article that I think does a better job showing that this has no business being in court: http://seankevincoyne.com/2008/10/27/spare-the-rod-spoil-the-child/

[QueQueg]

Your poll is specifically flawed because, even though there are 10 boxes to check, there are really only two choices:

Choice 1: It's OK for the government to tell me how to parent my kids (by using the phrase "should never be allowed" as though dictated by a higher authority)
Choice 2: Corporal punishment is great.

Including "I have absolutely no idea or opinion" is only encouraging internet douche-baggery. If someone has no opinion, they have no business posting.

My point? Simply that you post stuff like this because you're in the mood to fight with some liberals.

[Johan]

There's no other kind. You can't force people to participate in research.

Randomized sampling; blind sampling. Not all data requires volunteer participation. Not to be insulting, but if you knew about research you would know this. If I wanted to get a randomized sample of data on sexual behavior, I could canvas area hospitals for sexually transmitted diseases and compare the rate to the broader population, just as an example.

Volunteer data is shit. It's unreliable. He's lauded for doing despicable things because he made sexual deviance look normal...which is a result of his volunteer data, since those whose sexual behavior was on the outlier/perimeter of society are already quite unconcerned with societal restraints and more inclined to volunteer such data.

But look, if you want to make the argument that he should have been locked up for not reporting the pedophiles' identity to the authorities, I can see where you're coming from.

That's exactly where I'm coiming from.

...it's not actually relevant to the topic... so, uh, I guess I fail on my first post... :(

It's relevant to a conversation between two people, and since I actually started this thread, I'm not at all offended by the segue.

Your poll is specifically flawed

Your recap of the poll is flawed. I'm not Tony the Tiger; I never said corporal punishment is "great." Also, there are two fundamental choices here...it's either acceptable, or it's not. Quite simple.

[Young Al Capone]

Same thing. Also been told that big sticks were actually preferable because little thin ones actually stung more.

Yeah, that is what my parents said too. If it was pine, than a nice sturdy branch was better than a small and flexible one. It worked two ways, the parent wasn't really willing to hit all that hard with the big one and the increased surface area distributed the damage nicely.

[Johan]

I searched on the "Barry W. Barnett" and found an article that I think does a better job showing that this has no business being in court: http://seankevincoyne.com/2008/10/27/spare-the-rod-spoil-the-child/

Apparently it was the boy’s teacher who had notified social services as to the bruising on the boy’s buttocks. How the teacher found out about about it may be another matter for the courts entirely.

At the pastor’s hearing, Barnett’s son said his father was right to spank him.

The Divine Savior Healthcare emergency department’s medical report, given June 7, indicated that the boy had some minor bruising on his buttocks but said there was no swelling and he was not in pain. The medical paperwork said the boy told doctors he didn’t think he was abused by his father and that he loves him.

The boy’s doctor does not believe he was abused, as he called the event a “social services fiasco.”

Ruling Thursday, a Judge is sending the case to trial. At the Columbia County Courthouse, a group of Pastor Barnett’s peers will hear arguments on the case and eventually decide whether the spanking constituted “reasonable discipline” permitted under state law.

This just further proves my point as to how RIDICULOUS this case is. Also, let me say this...there is NO WAY a teacher should be checking out a kid's ass or asking them if they have bruises on their ass and can I see. That seems pretty freaking obvious to me, but hey, I'm conservative so I must be nuts! :D Judges are a joke in this country, as well. Just a joke.

[QueQueg]

This just further proves my point as to how RIDICULOUS this case is.

You're right, that is ridiculous. The county should investigate the teacher to find out why he/she knew anything was wrong with the kid's butt-cheeks.

I was going to say "I still think the guys a bad parent." On second thought... there are plenty of ways to be a good parent/bad parent. Spanking your kid is a pretty minor thing. If he loves his kid, spends time with him, makes him happy, then he's a good parent.

Spanking is a pretty minor thing, in the big picture of parenting.

[Mr. Murphy]

My little brother used to bruise if you grabbed his arm in excitement to show him something.

The media gets more attention when it is sensationalist. These bruises could have been the most minor of discolorations, you don't know. Also, two smacks on the ass with a flat paddle (which hurts much less than a 'stick', people), is simply not a beating by any means. It's a spanking.

[A. S. Houdini]

It's relevant to a conversation between two people, and since I actually started this thread, I'm not at all offended by the segue.

Oh! Cool. I'll carry on then.

Randomized sampling; blind sampling. Not all data requires volunteer participation.

I see what you mean--I misunderstood. I thought you were suggesting "chloroform and an unmarked van" sampling. Yes, I agree, there are other ways. But, there are some kinds of data, most of THIS kind of data, that does require volunteer data--I mean, I've never read a medical chart or had a medical history taken, but I'm pretty sure there's a fair amount of information about personal sexual habits that doesn't go on there. Even in STD cases. And the possibility exists (especially in STD cases) that the patient lies during the medical history.

And volunteer bias... yes. It exists, and it's a problem, but it doesn't invalidate an entire form of gathering data. I mean, political polls are now a major part of the "game" of an election cycle--precisely because they have predictive value. The blanket statement that volunteer data doesn't work is false. Kinsey's may have been, but the validity of his data is sort of irrelevant to why I think he should be remembered as something other than a despicable pedophile.

On the subject of locking Kinsey and associates up, his behavior does seem to constitute SOMETHING illegal, right? Doesn't that make him an accessory or something? Anyway, lock him up, sure. But it doesn't completely eliminate consideration of the effect he had on the science of sex. He made terrible missteps--among them, collaborating (unnecessarily) with pedophiles. But they were just missteps (it's not like his collaboration changed the probability that the pedophiles would be caught), and he opened up an entire new scientific field on a subject that was long overdue for study. I think that he should be remembered in shades of gray, not as just good or just bad.

And, IMO, he was hardly on a par with Tuskeegee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_ Male)or the Nazi Doctors.

[Johan]

And, IMO, he was hardly on a par with Tuskeegee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_ Male)or the Nazi Doctors.

We can basically agree on that, though I'd say it's close in terms of Tuskegee (which is worse, knowing about children being raped and abused and doing nothing, or knowing about adults with syphilis and doing nothing? Hmmm....I'll go with the children. Both are despicable, however).

The recent film on his life was a total whitewash. He was an accessory to crimes against children, and the film made him out to be a hero.

[Scull]

I was physically abused as a child, and I was also punished with spankings and thumps to the head when I got out of line. There was a distinct difference between the two and I knew when one was deserved and when one wasn't. I fully support giving kids a spanking or thump when they get out of hand or won't listen, it gets the point across in a very memorable way. There is a line however, and crossing it constitutes abuse. Leaving bruises from a spanking doesn't cross that line, hitting somewhere other than the butt, drawing blood or breaking bones does.

[Young Al Capone]

Somewhat related story (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7695194.stm), or at least how to do it completely fucking wrong.

The teacher is reported by Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Alyoum to have told the prosecutor that he was only trying to "discipline the boy, not to kill him".

Jeez, that is quite the explanation, I am sure the parents understand completely.

[Whunpo]

Obviously I don't know your whole situation,
This.
I am a teenager, and I do consider my father a friend. Does that mean that I'm spoiled? No. I'm not spoiled. I get punished when I do wrong, however, that does not mean I cannot be friends with my dad. I understand your generalization, and I'm sure there are cases like that, but it is not mine.

[Cpl_Punnishment]

wow, took me a second to read the poll and realize it wasn't about my kids.

anyway - should it be allowed - yes, by parents or legal guardians

just no 'beatings"... but spanking is fine.

obviously there is an age limit, but my kids are only 5 so I havent reached that yet.

for the record, i've only had to spank my kids once each.
now the fear takes over and it isn't necessary.

nothing like sending the kids to their room to await "daddys decision on punishment"

also of note: I went to a private school that enforced Corporal Punishment when a kid misbehaved. I was beaten with one of those long wooden pointer sticks.

it sucked..

[JayK47]

Kids need to be beaten

Damn straight!

[Abednigo]

Yes, to a point. There's never a reason to beat the shit out of your kids, but a spanking or smack on the hand when it's merited is something that should be done.

That says it all right there. Some parents can take it too far and it's abuse (which should never happen). Why can't governments just let parents be parents? :mad:

[Xerxes]

I think the issue is the line for beating and discipline got blurred.

If you give a kid a black eye, break a bone, inflicted 2nd degree burns or made it where they can't sit cause their back has lashes with meat and blood dripping of they back, then yeah you probably crossed the line.

Hands, paddling, belts, rulers and a bunch of other discipline methods don't have to leave them scared for life. People don't have to get involved until the see a uppercut or a limping kid. Some folks be doing it wrong. You ain't supposed to lose you're cool to no whippings either. End up hurting themselves in the process.