If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
We should discuss socioeconomic status as a mitigating factor in the use of CP. And how to address that issue.
Or is that too current and real for you?
__________________
Becca Momma to two boys Big Guy 3/02 and Wuvy-Buv 8/05 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
beccafromlalaland wrote: We should discuss socioeconomic status as a mitigating factor in the use of CP. And how to address that issue. Who is "we?" Or is that too current and real for you? Are you addressing me, or the group? -- beccafromlalaland I've no problem addressing that issue. The answers are probably far out of reach for most in this group though. Alan Greenspan does not post here. The more immediate and more accessible issues would have the most immediate impact pun intended on the spanking issue. I'm not here, though I can't speak for others, say Doan, to idly distract and misdirect folks. To me this is a practical matter of mitigating children's daily pain and fear. I'd be, when we are through discussing "socioeconomic status," going back to the more proximate issues. How to change attitude and long held beliefs seems more important to me. While that's no easy job, it seems more accessible than how to change socioeconomic status and hope that that has an effect on spanking. I don't think there's an appreciable drop in spanking rates until you reach very high levels of income. Now if you wanted to deal with abusive discipline, that could be factored in with CPS data from the USDHS and you could find socioeconomic influences. I think it's time we welcomed discussion on what a law should look like that bans spanking. While I disagree with you that a 25 year old study is outdated (we use the ancient research of others in current science and industry commonly...take a class in electrical engineering for instance) I do agree that there is "current" things to look at. And what could be more current than a new law, either a state law for each state, or though less my preference, a single federal law. What should be in such a spanking or CP ban law? But feel free to explore "socioeconomic status as a mitigating factor in the use of CP. And how to address that issue." If I'm interested I'll be happy to contribute in whatever way I can. Kane |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why for instance in America are parenting classes only available to parents after the fact. After they have been investigated for child abuse, after their children have been placed in foster care when the parents are either desperate to get their kids, or so angry that they refuse to attend parenting workshops. I know in my state parenting classes are available but certainly not encouraged for at risk parents (young parents,families on assistance, single parents, parents who grew up in abusive households)
I think before we can even consider a non-spanking law we need to address the issues of these at risk parents, get them into parenting classes, give them mentors, teach them appropriate discipline strategies. Give them a support network so when they feel overwhelmed with the responsibilities of parenthood they can get help BEFORE there is a problem.
__________________
Becca Momma to two boys Big Guy 3/02 and Wuvy-Buv 8/05 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
beccafromlalaland wrote: Why for instance in America are parenting classes only available to parents after the fact. There is no such limit. Anyone wishing to take a parenting class can find them easily. Health departments, parks and recreation, mental health departments, some schools, private instructors are all available. In fact, you can even find on-line classes. http://tinyurl.com/dastb After they have been investigated for child abuse, after their children have been placed in foster care when the parents are either desperate to get their kids, or so angry that they refuse to attend parenting workshops. How would you get them to go to parenting classes until they were compelled to? The classes are everywhere. They are even free in some places. http://tinyurl.com/7fzqp I know in my state parenting classes are available but certainly not encouraged for at risk parents (young parents,families on assistance, single parents, parents who grew up in abusive households) How are they not encouraged? You mean actively discouraged, or not publicized enough? I think before we can even consider a non-spanking law we need to address the issues of these at risk parents, get them into parenting classes, give them mentors, teach them appropriate discipline strategies. Give them a support network so when they feel overwhelmed with the responsibilities of parenthood they can get help BEFORE there is a problem. Two problems, I think. One is that you cannot compel them to attend unless they have CPS intervention going on. It would be civil rights violation. I've argued with state legislators over this when one governor or another proposed "early intervention" with new mothers in geographical areas considered high risk, or with behaviors considered high risk. They understood rather easily when I pointed out the BOR to them from the Constitution. One cannot compel another's actions without due cause. And that has to be addressed with some action. The only legal action would be child protection statutes. Thus we come around again to the law. Two, money. Who will provide this support network? Churches, local interest groups, even the local health department schedules a variety of things to get young parents involved, especially new mothers, even providing child care during the meetings. The problem is that the families that are targetted for this help can refuse to respond, or simply not be interested, and that is certainly their right. I do not support compelled services unless the level of problem has reached a proportion that has involved child protection services by the state. And while at one time such programs could access hospital records for new births, and visit the new mothers directly, they are now proscribed from doing so by HIPAA. Any PR or marketing of the programs have to be addressed into to already crowded media advertising world. This is precisely why I support a law addressing the actual behavior. There is nothing; poverty, large families, single parenting that MAKES a parent spank a child. A law will address the issue directly. It will mean nothing to those that already do these things for their children. They won't be effected. They already actively seek alternatives to CP. Collect and study information about child development. Provide themselves with strees reducing activities and strategies for when parenting overwhelms them. In the law, I'll insist on having these issues addressed. There must be public funding support for programs mandated to help those charged and convicted of spanking. If not, there's little point in the law, though these things in the past have tended to sort themselves out. I imagine when women's sufferage was finally a fact there was some support for teaching women the political processes they were about to engage in. There was supposed to be help for freed slaves, but that didn't go as well. The law banning spanking would work for all concerned. The parent convicted of spanking could then DEMAND state support for them to rehabilitate. At least some reimbursement, some child care, some training monies. I'd be happy with that. These problems you have mentioned are ones that have been addressed before at great length by society. They have done pretty much all they can do, sans constitutional violations, at this point. Now it's time to move forward with a law. -- beccafromlalaland Kane PS, Embry and Malfetti found that there was a change from baseline counted street entries from 9.7 per hour by children, to, after the program, 0.7 entries per hour. What was also remarkable was that the rate of "safe play" praise by parents also shot up after they had been trained. In fact, 33 times more such incidents after the program than before at measuring for the baseline. Even children having a very low baseline street entry rate, dropped considerably after the training was in place. 1.8 entries per hour, as opposed to 0.2 per hour with the program in place. Only 10% of the baseline rate. Pretty remarkable when one considers that parents who spanked before had children that attemped entries at the highest rate of all per hour. K~ -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
#5
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Quote:
Quote:
The classes are not everywhere. Quote:
Quote:
Sometimes you have to go through the back door to get to the front door. Quote:
Local government would be responsible for the support network. In my area most support groups for new parents, or parents with problems are either offered at the Intermediate school district, or at the Hospital. Quote:
Yet you support a law to prohibit spanking, without first having programs in place to teach parents new techniques. If we were a bunch of cannabals who didn't know how to butcher a cow, would you be in support of a law that prohibits people eating without first teaching people how to butcher a cow? (weird analogy, but I think it works) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Speaking of punishment...what type of punishment do you have in mind for this law? Quote:
__________________
Becca Momma to two boys Big Guy 3/02 and Wuvy-Buv 8/05 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
beccafromlalaland wrote: 0:- Wrote: There is no such limit. Anyone wishing to take a parenting class can find them easily. Health departments, parks and recreation, mental health departments, some schools, private instructors are all available. In fact, you can even find on-line classes. In my area no one talks about parenting classes until it's too late. Who is responsible for that? They are not encouraged, they are only available at certain times that make it inconveniant for working parents, no child care is available. Sorry about your area. Have you researched more? Most low income families that I know do not have a computer, nor do they know how to use the internet, nor do they have time to go to the library to take a class on how to use the internet. So how are they to gain access to parenting classes? I have no idea. How do they find time to watch TV? Bowl? Tavern hang? Check again with your county health department for available child rearing classes. By the way, I know many low income families and very few lack a computer. They are just so cheap these days. Used are going for $50 to a hundred bucks, with software installed, lots of it, including a browser. And kids are taught computer use in public schools. I'm still puzzled though that you think the community has some responsibility above and beyond the parents themselves to aquire better parenting skills, so they won't feel the need to spank. Remember, we are talking about making it a law not to spank. That is a motivator. Just like traffic laws that require being able to pass a driving test. Or a food handler's permit. Or practicing law. It's the person's responsibility...not one elses. No matter how available parenting information might be you cannot force people to access it unless you have a law that makes it illegal to spank. Non consentual spanking is assault if performed on an adult. How can it logically not be just because it's performed on a child. Kane kane Wrote: How would you get them to go to parenting classes until they were compelled to? The classes are everywhere. They are even free in some places. How would you force people to obey a no-spanking law without first setting up a support network, and educational resources? The classes are not everywhere. kane Wrote: How are they not encouraged? You mean actively discouraged, or not publicized enough? See above. kane Wrote: Two problems, I think. One is that you cannot compel them to attend unless they have CPS intervention going on. It would be civil rights violation. I've argued with state legislators over this when one governor or another proposed "early intervention" with new mothers in geographical areas considered high risk, or with behaviors considered high risk. They understood rather easily when I pointed out the BOR to them from the Constitution. One cannot compel another's actions without due cause. And that has to be addressed with some action. The only legal action would be child protection statutes. I was once considered an at risk parent. I was 19 with a newborn, and a history of family abuse. You know what my local hospital did upon discharge from the maternity unit. Sent a nurse to my home once a week for the first 6months of my child's life. She came to check up on my child, and my physical and emotional recovery. She provided me with information. She caught my post partum depression. She helped insure that mother child bond grew properly. If at 6months she felt that we needed more help she would have continued with her visits, and provided me with more information. Sometimes you have to go through the back door to get to the front door. kane Wrote: Two, money. Who will provide this support network? Churches, local interest groups, even the local health department schedules a variety of things to get young parents involved, especially new mothers, even providing child care during the meetings. if you are talking passing of a Federal Law then it should be Federal Money that pays for the classes, locations, and child care. Local government would be responsible for the support network. In my area most support groups for new parents, or parents with problems are either offered at the Intermediate school district, or at the Hospital. kane Wrote: The problem is that the families that are targetted for this help can refuse to respond, or simply not be interested, and that is certainly their right. I do not support compelled services unless the level of problem has reached a proportion that has involved child protection services by the state. yes that is certainly their right, but even having the help publicized to a level that will continually remind them that it is available would be a step in the right direction. As it stands now, you only hear of parenting classes if you are ordered to take them or you are looking for them. Yet you support a law to prohibit spanking, without first having programs in place to teach parents new techniques. If we were a bunch of cannabals who didn't know how to butcher a cow, would you be in support of a law that prohibits people eating without first teaching people how to butcher a cow? (weird analogy, but I think it works) kane Wrote: And while at one time such programs could access hospital records for new births, and visit the new mothers directly, they are now proscribed from doing so by HIPAA. Any PR or marketing of the programs have to be addressed into to already crowded media advertising world. As of september 2004 my local hospital was still sending nurses to new mother's homes. kane Wrote: There is nothing; poverty, large families, single parenting that MAKES a parent spank a child. I disagree. perhaps the situation doesn't "make" them spank...but it certainly makes it easier to spank. kane Wrote: A law will address the issue directly. How?? Do the laws against murder address the issues that cause a person to murder? No they just provide incentive not to, and punishment when you do. Speaking of punishment...what type of punishment do you have in mind for this law? kane Wrote: . Provide themselves with strees reducing activities and strategies for when parenting overwhelms them. Many single parent households, poor households, etc. Don't have the luxuery of a parental "time out" They have to work, they have to parent, they have to clean the house, they don't have the help needed to take a break. -- beccafromlalaland |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I noticed that you only responded to those items that you could ask more questions...and did not answer any of my questions.
Dodging?
__________________
Becca Momma to two boys Big Guy 3/02 and Wuvy-Buv 8/05 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
That's just typical of ignoranus kane0. Be prepare for the adhom from him, beccafromlalalan. ;-) Doan On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, beccafromlalaland wrote: I noticed that you only responded to those items that you could ask more questions...and did not answer any of my questions. Dodging? -- beccafromlalaland |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
beccafromlalaland wrote:
I noticed that you only responded to those items that you could ask more questions...and did not answer any of my questions. That is untrue. I have responded to every post and to every question. I have asked questions of my own where you asked and confined your premise to your geo area. I have asked when the question did not make sense in context. And I have have asked, then gone on to answer the question you poses or comment you offered where I thought I was being invited to. Dodging? If you can find a place I dodged please point it out and I'll happily answer, or where I cannot admit I cannot. I will also ask questions to gain more information about your question so that I can, hopefully, answer. You did not attribute in the post I'm responding to now any of the prior posts. When I read them over, as I just did, I do NOT see where your accusation is true. But I'm open for correction if you'll point out my 'dodging.' In fact, I'll go back over my own posts in this thread and do it FOR you. Feel free to correct my doing so. I do not hide, dodge, mislead, lie, or otherwise attempt to obfuscate these issues. And never have. Kane -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
If you want to discuss something I feel is relevant
This reply to my own message is in the form it is to answer
beccafromlalalands comment and question in a recent post to me: "I noticed that you only responded to those items that you could ask more questions...and did not answer any of my questions. Dodging? -- beccafromlalaland " I shall attempt either to answer any unanswered questions or admit that I do not have an answer. My comments [[ will be in square brackets ]]. 0:- wrote: beccafromlalaland wrote: We should discuss socioeconomic status as a mitigating factor in the use of CP. And how to address that issue. Who is "we?" [[ I was not asked a question ]] Or is that too current and real for you? Are you addressing me, or the group? [[ becca did not use my name and I'm not the only person here. But I'll attempt to directly answer assuming, since we went on after this post, she does mean me in this instance. No it is not to current nor too real, and I've responded to it by stating so further in the post. It is just not relevant to what I wish to discuss. ]] -- beccafromlalaland I've no problem addressing that issue. The answers are probably far out of reach for most in this group though. Alan Greenspan does not post here. [[ While my answer was whimsical it's obvious that I do not consider it possible to solve economic problems before addressing the spanking issue. If we waited for economic answers for the solution to problems we'd have the cart before the horse. ]] The more immediate and more accessible issues would have the most immediate impact pun intended on the spanking issue. I'm not here, though I can't speak for others, say Doan, to idly distract and misdirect folks. To me this is a practical matter of mitigating children's daily pain and fear. I'd be, when we are through discussing "socioeconomic status," going back to the more proximate issues. How to change attitude and long held beliefs seems more important to me. While that's no easy job, it seems more accessible than how to change socioeconomic status and hope that that has an effect on spanking. [[ I continue to address your question, becca. I am not dodging. I am not an economist, thus can't answer such questions authoritatively. And they are a diversion from the real issue here. Related by not pivotal. ]] I don't think there's an appreciable drop in spanking rates until you reach very high levels of income. Now if you wanted to deal with abusive discipline, that could be factored in with CPS data from the USDHS and you could find socioeconomic influences. [[ I continue to answer your original question, the best I can...no dodgin' here, or do you consider that I am not whatever kind of professional that would be involved for any question you ask as my "dodging?" ]] I think it's time we welcomed discussion on what a law should look like that bans spanking. While I disagree with you that a 25 year old study is outdated (we use the ancient research of others in current science and industry commonly...take a class in electrical engineering for instance) I do agree that there is "current" things to look at. And what could be more current than a new law, either a state law for each state, or though less my preference, a single federal law. What should be in such a spanking or CP ban law? But feel free to explore "socioeconomic status as a mitigating factor in the use of CP. And how to address that issue." [[ While I cannot, nor do I wish to spend time on an issue that others could better address, socioeconomic status, I am inviting you to if you have something to say. What's "dodging" about that? ]] If I'm interested I'll be happy to contribute in whatever way I can. [[ And I'm still open to more questions on YOUR issue if you wish to ask them. You did NOT take that invitation. I could call you a "dodger" for that, but will not since in the normal course of a conversational exchange, debate or otherwise, people move on from subject to subject, issue to issue, item to item, as a matter of course. In this group presently posting only Doan would stoop to such low tactics and ploys. I can't imagine that you would, purposefully. Why accuse me of dodging "and did not answer any of my questions," as you put it? That's simply not true. ]] Kane Thank you for reading. On to the next post in this series to see if I failed to answer any questions, let alone "did not answer any." Kane -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | October 29th 04 05:23 AM |
The regret mothers now feel ("Why are these parents not shocked over the pain?"): | Pointed Elbow | Pregnancy | 1 | October 9th 04 02:06 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | September 29th 04 05:17 AM |
Parent Stress Index another idiotic indicator list | Greg Hanson | General | 11 | March 22nd 04 12:40 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |