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
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
A teenager who is faced with a spanking, especially if its a teenage girl, should go straight to the police. This is something to take VERY seriously! No teenager should allow his or her body to be violated. Protect your body and protect yourself. If faced with such a situation go straight to the police! As for anybody who spanks or who considers spanking teenagers, dont do anything stupid like that. If you do the teenager could go to the police and you would end up behind bars. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
My thoughts on spanking a teenager is they shouldn't be handled that
way when getting in trouble for something they did. Whether its the parents who are doing the spanking or not, there grown out of the childish stage and are too grown to receive spankings anymore. I don't think you should just specifically point out a girl because boys can go to the police as well if they are getting spanked or hurt. I really don't see why the cops need to be involved in the situation if a teenager is getting spanked cause its not like they are getting beat. Now if they were getting a beating they would know the difference between the two. Then thats when they can go to the police and let them handle it. fistoffury wrote: A teenager who is faced with a spanking, especially if its a teenage girl, should go straight to the police. This is something to take VERY seriously! No teenager should allow his or her body to be violated. Protect your body and protect yourself. If faced with such a situation go straight to the police! As for anybody who spanks or who considers spanking teenagers, dont do anything stupid like that. If you do the teenager could go to the police and you would end up behind bars. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
My thoughts on spanking a teenager is they shouldn't be handled that
way when getting in trouble for something they did. Whether its the parents who are doing the spanking or not, there grown out of the childish stage and are too grown to receive spankings anymore. I don't think you should just specifically point out a girl because boys can go to the police as well if they are getting spanked or hurt. I really don't see why the cops need to be involved in the situation if a teenager is getting spanked cause its not like they are getting beat. Now if they were getting a beating they would know the difference between the two. Then thats when they can go to the police and let them handle it. fistoffury wrote: A teenager who is faced with a spanking, especially if its a teenage girl, should go straight to the police. This is something to take VERY seriously! No teenager should allow his or her body to be violated. Protect your body and protect yourself. If faced with such a situation go straight to the police! As for anybody who spanks or who considers spanking teenagers, dont do anything stupid like that. If you do the teenager could go to the police and you would end up behind bars. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
My thoughts on spanking a teenager is they shouldn't be handled that
way when getting in trouble for something they did. Whether its the parents who are doing the spanking or not, there grown out of the childish stage and are too grown to receive spankings anymore. I don't think you should just specifically point out a girl because boys can go to the police as well if they are getting spanked or hurt. I really don't see why the cops need to be involved in the situation if a teenager is getting spanked cause its not like they are getting beat. Now if they were getting a beating they would know the difference between the two. Then thats when they can go to the police and let them handle it. fistoffury wrote: A teenager who is faced with a spanking, especially if its a teenage girl, should go straight to the police. This is something to take VERY seriously! No teenager should allow his or her body to be violated. Protect your body and protect yourself. If faced with such a situation go straight to the police! As for anybody who spanks or who considers spanking teenagers, dont do anything stupid like that. If you do the teenager could go to the police and you would end up behind bars. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Fake!
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Fake!
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
"0:-" wrote in message
ups.com... Please tell us the difference between say a "hard spanking" and a beating. To me, the biggest distinguishing factor is whether the parent is out of control. In a beating, the parent's goal is to lash out in anger and hurt the child for making the parent angry (and perhaps inconveniencing the parent, etc.). In a "hard spanking," the parent has himself or herself under control to a point of being able to think about whether a spanking or something else is the most suitable punishment, and to base the severity of the spanking on the seriousness of the offense rather than on the parent's anger. The reason the spanking is hard is that the seriousness of the offense warrants it, not that the parent is out of control. Most of the time, it shouldn't be all that hard for a teenager to distinguish between these two descriptions if he or she is willing to be honest with himself or herself, and to take a little time to think about how the situation looked from the parent's perspective. As for reasons why parents might reasonably view spanking as the most appropriate choice, I can think of some examples. First, some teenagers would view a spanking - even a hard one - as less bad than the alternative their parents would choose if they don't spank. Second, parents might decide that spanking makes sense because spankings don't cause nearly as much long-term hassle and friction as forms of punishment that aren't over as quickly. (That would vary a lot depending on the personalities of individual children.) And third, the threat of spanking could be needed to enforce the terms of some other punishment - and any credible threat risks the possibility that the threat will need to be carried out. This isn't to say that every beating (as interpreted by the parent's motive) is grounds for criminal prosecution, or that hard spankings can never cause so much damage as to warrant prosecution. The legal boundaries vary from state to state, but my personal view is that if a parent deliberately intends to spank hard enough to cause bruising, there had better be an exceptionally good reason why the punishment needed to be so severe. And if there is a pattern of spankings hard enough to cause bruises, the presumption has to be that either the bruising is deliberate or the parent is out of control. Granted, this still leaves a gray area where the parent's motive is unclear, or it is unclear whether the severity of a spanking is warranted by the seriousness of a child's behavior. But the sad truth is that we live in a world with a lot of gray in it, and wishing we could always draw clean lines between black and white doesn't make the gray go away. From what I've seen, the only people who don't see a lot of shades of gray tend to be unthinking zealots who are so focused on an extreme position that they refuse to see any merit in arguments that conflict with their preconceptions. And I regard that kind of zealotry as a whole lot more dangerous than accepting the existence of shades of gray. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Having a sock party Kane?
Bunch of socks.
But it's "moral or ethical" because you BELIEVE in your crusade, right Don? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
Nathan A. Barclay wrote: "0:-" wrote in message ups.com... Please tell us the difference between say a "hard spanking" and a beating. To me, the biggest distinguishing factor is whether the parent is out of control. There are plenty of people that most coldly and in careful control do things like take switches to the hands of babies as young as two months old. It's even taught by one couple that claim to be an information source for child rearing. They call it, 'training up the child." In a beating, the parent's goal is to lash out in anger and hurt the child for making the parent angry (and perhaps inconveniencing the parent, etc.). That's one scenario. On the other hand people have been known, frequently to apply all kinds of CP without any appearance of "lashing out." In a "hard spanking," the parent has himself or herself under control to a point of being able to think about whether a spanking or something else is the most suitable punishment, and to base the severity of the spanking on the seriousness of the offense rather than on the parent's anger. The reason the spanking is hard is that the seriousness of the offense warrants it, not that the parent is out of control. Most of the time, it shouldn't be all that hard for a teenager to distinguish between these two descriptions if he or she is willing to be honest with himself or herself, and to take a little time to think about how the situation looked from the parent's perspective. The current data collected on this, internationally, by surveying parents, show that regardless of the accepting or rejecting mindset there are unwanted negative consequences. I posted that recently here. As for reasons why parents might reasonably view spanking as the most appropriate choice, I can think of some examples. First, some teenagers would view a spanking - even a hard one - as less bad than the alternative their parents would choose if they don't spank. Such as? Second, parents might decide that spanking makes sense because spankings don't cause nearly as much long-term hassle and friction as forms of punishment that aren't over as quickly. (That would vary a lot depending on the personalities of individual children.) It sounds as though you are describing parents that have a more punitive parenting style. Why must other alternaties cause long-term hasle and friction? If I found my children doing something I disapproved of, it was usually dispensed with in a few minutes and unlikely to come up again. In fact spanking tends not to suppress unwanted behavior and MORE time and hassle ensues. It also is a very weak deterent when the parent is not actually supervising. And third, the threat of spanking could be needed to enforce the terms of some other punishment - and any credible threat risks the possibility that the threat will need to be carried out. Teaching by threat? This isn't to say that every beating (as interpreted by the parent's motive) is grounds for criminal prosecution, or that hard spankings can never cause so much damage as to warrant prosecution. A great many of the child abuse cases of physical abuse, with broken skin, deep injuries, even broken bones, or burns etc. were claimed by the parent to be "discipline." The legal boundaries vary from state to state, Actually the statutes read very much the same. There is some small amount of caselaw that brings in differences. but my personal view is that if a parent deliberately intends to spank hard enough to cause bruising, there had better be an exceptionally good reason why the punishment needed to be so severe. Bruising is injury. And if there is a pattern of spankings hard enough to cause bruises, the presumption has to be that either the bruising is deliberate or the parent is out of control. I don't think it's a either or situation. If there is bruising there is injury. Intent has little to do with it. The child tends, when injured by the parent, to presume the parent meant to injury, and that the child him or herself, deserved to be injured. I've watched adults posting to this newsgroup defend their own beatings administered by their parents as 'deserved,' even when they were left bloody as a result. Granted, this still leaves a gray area where the parent's motive is unclear, or it is unclear whether the severity of a spanking is warranted by the seriousness of a child's behavior. But the sad truth is that we live in a world with a lot of gray in it, and wishing we could always draw clean lines between black and white doesn't make the gray go away. We should not try, nevertheless? From what I've seen, the only people who don't see a lot of shades of gray tend to be unthinking zealots who are so focused on an extreme position that they refuse to see any merit in arguments that conflict with their preconceptions. Personally I have no trouble seeing the continuum from a mild pat on the bottom of say a diapered toddler to forcing a teen ager to drop their pants and take a sever beating with a paddle, switch, strap, etc. Of course there is a continuum. My question has to do with where, exactly, on that continuum "spanking" without injury leaves off and abusive injury takes place. And I regard that kind of zealotry as a whole lot more dangerous than accepting the existence of shades of gray. Well let's look at that. Let's say you would call me a zealot. Some do that cannot argue and debate from facts and logic. Here is my zealotry, in a nutshell. I believe from evidence I've seen both empirically and in data, that even mild spanking has a fairly strong risk of producing psychological injury if not physical. I've seen mild "spankings" gradually over time escalate into majory beatings that injure the child...and that progression from milder "spanking" not working. In fact from the viewpoint of a behaviorist model it appears the parent is teaching the child to grow more accustomed to more pain. Very strange thinking to my mind. I did not believe, until early this past year that passing legislation to ban spanking was a wise thing to do. Watching the arguments in this newsgroup, and those put forward in the media by spanking advocates (who themselves seemed to be speaking in zealot jargon...no basis in fact, just unsupported claims) it occured to me I've been expecting things to improve in this area of teaching by pain and humiliation since I was about 19 years old. So far, not enough progress. So I proposed, which has been routinely lied about by some posters as "forcing parents to conform," we introduce the Swedish model. Legislation to encourage and support a change in attitude in all of society, where spanking is seen as offensive and poor parenting, with of course the law providing a way to deliver VOLUNTEER services to families that wish to learn less punitive parenting methods. As in Sweden, I suggest no penalties for violating this law. For that I've been called a zealot. It's odd, if one examines certain odd things obout our laws relating to spanking. I presume you are arguing that spanking is a good thing. I don't support laws that require us to do 'good things.' Like I would fight any law that said I had to take vitamins. I'll take them if I wish. Yet every state, with one exception, has had to pass laws that expressly protect this "good thing" called spanking. Why would that be necessary if we really believed that spanking was a "good thing?" No law, no statute, by the way, defines where the line is between safe CP and abusive hitting. The ONLY way you can tell from the law is after the fact. You know you have crossed the line if you draw blood, or break bones, etc. And even if you do it enough that it becomes psychologically injurious to the child. But why can't the law state clearly how hard, how often, with what, at what stroke frequency, a parent can spank, based on the child's age, and physical and psychological condition? We don't put professional athletes on the field without a great deal of monitoring by medical personnel to determine if they are fit to take the rigors of their sport. Yet we expect parents to be experts in gauging this condition readying them to safely receive Corporal Punishment....and we see those parents fail again and again injurying their child when they claim they only meant to "discipline." Strauss remarked on this. I'll have to paraphrase, but basically he pointed out that we have other effective methods of teaching and even if spanking were as effect spanking still has a built in risk factor the other methods don't. What does work? Well, it's well known that negative attention to unwanted behavior can and does reinforce that behavior especially in the age range that is spanked most often, the toddler to five. Positive attention to unwanted behavior by way of showing the child the desired replacement behavior is the key. And this is not brain surgery. It's really very simple if we let go of our "control" issues. Kane |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
More Teenagers Seek Help From Psychiatrists | Jan | Kids Health | 29 | April 23rd 06 05:53 PM |
Third of US teenagers are unfit | Roman Bystrianyk | Kids Health | 1 | January 3rd 06 02:57 AM |
Teenagers' behaviour 'worsening' | Roman Bystrianyk | Kids Health | 1 | September 20th 04 12:12 PM |
PA: Erie Co., CYS failure-Busy chasin' spankings? | Fern5827 | Spanking | 0 | June 14th 04 04:19 PM |
Why are so many teenagers so foul mouthed and disgusting? | [email protected] | General | 8 | April 13th 04 06:59 PM |