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
|
|||
|
|||
Is CPS on topic for this NG? From FAQ's
Written by Neal. Whose keen intelligence is sorely missed.
C 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. Comment by Fern: CPS has intruded upon millions of families over the past 27 years when CAPTA enacted. CPS is absolutely on point for this NG. DESCRIPTORS; CHILD PROTECTIVE, SPANKING, INGRAHAM V WRIGHT, FAMILY LAW, SOCIAL WORK, CPS, DFS, DSS, DHR, TDPRS,ACS, DCF, CYS,CYF, DYFS, DCF, DCYF, CORPORAL PUNISHMENT, SPANKING, CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS, RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS, PRS, CPA, CSB, DFYS, DFACS, CSB,FIA |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Is CPS on topic for this NG? From FAQ's
Fern5827 wrote: 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. However, many of your posts have absolutely nothing to do with spanking, and are nothing but rants against CPS. These posts belong on alt.support.child-protective-services. Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. Posts discussing spanking are appropriate on alt.parenting.spanking. Posts that have nothing to do with spanking and alternative forms of discipline but have the sole purpose to rant about CPS belong on alt.support.child-protective-services. Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. This ng I am posting from is alt.parenting.spanking. The purpose of this ng is to discuss spanking as a disciplinary method and disciplinary alternatives. I have cross-posted this to alt.support.child-protective-services. Fern's posts thar have nothing to do with spanking children but only with her perceived CPS abuses need to be posted to the CPS ng. LaVonne |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Is CPS on topic for this NG? From FAQ's
LaVonne Carlson wrote
Neal said in message deal with issues of child abuse That's what you get for calling spanking BEATING, LaVonne. and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. However, many of your posts have absolutely nothing to do with spanking, and are nothing but rants against CPS. These posts belong on alt.support.child-protective-services. If Neal did not say this I will: Parenting does not happen in a vacuum. Spanking or not spanking happens under the scrutiny of big brother CPS. To avoid that CONTEXT would be a NONSENSICAL view of spanking or not spanking. Who appointed YOU to play Net Nazi, LaVonne? Did you know THAT violates general newsgroup rules? Besides, you seem to complain SELECTIVELY, so I can have NO RESPECT for this little tactic on your part. You defend CPS and bureaucracy at every turn, but I haven't seen you SAY MUCH about the wonderful Foster Parents who starved 4 boys to emaciation while getting regular visits from CPS. How can any discussion of the context and environment not include the horror stories about what might happen to kids removed for spanking or spanking gone wrong? To ignore the complexities of the issues is to be idiotically simplistic about parenting, as if there is some place where you can parent in a vacuum. LaVonne wrote alternative forms of discipline As in making child wash off pee with cold water after discovering that happy warm guilt free showers were causing the frequency of wetting at school to INCREASE? (Positive reinforcement of a negative behavior)? sole purpose to rant Whatever you say herr Doktor! Those who object most strenuously to posts Neal was talking about you, LaVonne! Neal (continued) in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. Yep, that's LaVonne! snip Fern does not post EVERYTHING on both newsgroups, and I suspect that when people cross post things it is often out of excitement or outrage and often perhaps not because spanking is involved. As Neal pointed out, you seem to want to conceal the truth about child abuse agencies and how they actually work. Recently you demanded proof of me for something that was WELL KNOWN, that every state CPS agency had failed Federal Audits for compliance with regulations. It is crucial to understanding the capricious willy nilly behavior of CPS and therefore the political environment in which a spanking or non-spanking parent may be constrained. Crucial to SOCIAL CONTEXT. Or do you wish to assert that SOCIAL CONTEXT has nothing to do with spanking or not spanking? If you wish to usurp parents rights to choose whether or not to spank, which IS clearly your goal, understanding CPS in the real world as opposed to intent or theory seems germain. You lobby for anti-spanking laws while you naively state that they would not be used for child removals. Any such law would most definately be automatically and broadly be used to remove children to Foster Homes where the kids are 10 TIMES more likely to be sexually abused, and twice as likely to DIE. How do you honestly dare pretend that real world reports about how the Child Protection Industry functions are not totally germain to the anti-spanking laws you advocate? While the Hatch act may not stop you a state paid employee from such lobbying, that lobbying on your part ETHICALLY justifies the presentation of real world information about how CPS works, or more precisely, how CPS would MISUSE the sort of law you are lobbying for. In Summary: You dragged the camels nose into the tent ( with spanking == beating ) ( and proposing new child abuse law! ) ( ignorance of crucial info on failed Audits ) ( naive theory FAR from actual results. ) ( Your expression that it's not political further proves how naive you are. ) Who appointed you to keep pushing your idea of net etiquette? That's bad form. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Is CPS on topic for this NG? From FAQ's
"Greg Hanson" wrote in message om... LaVonne Carlson wrote Neal said in message deal with issues of child abuse That's what you get for calling spanking BEATING, LaVonne. and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. However, many of your posts have absolutely nothing to do with spanking, and are nothing but rants against CPS. These posts belong on alt.support.child-protective-services. If Neal did not say this I will: Parenting does not happen in a vacuum. Spanking or not spanking happens under the scrutiny of big brother CPS. To avoid that CONTEXT would be a NONSENSICAL view of spanking or not spanking. Who appointed YOU to play Net Nazi, LaVonne? LaVonne wrote, "However, many of your posts have absolutely nothing to do with spanking, and are nothing but rants against CPS. These posts belong on alt.support.child-protective-services." Sounds fair to me. Did you know THAT violates general newsgroup rules? Which rules? Besides, you seem to complain SELECTIVELY, so I can have NO RESPECT for this little tactic on your part. LaVonne is selective because some posts may be appropriate to both NGs and some may not. Sounds fair to me. You defend CPS and bureaucracy at every turn, If that's true, that's her opinion and she's entitled to it.. but I haven't seen you SAY MUCH about the wonderful Foster Parents who starved 4 boys to emaciation while getting regular visits from CPS. How can any discussion of the context and environment not include the horror stories about what might happen to kids removed for spanking or spanking gone wrong? Those kids were removed for spanking? To ignore the complexities of the issues is to be idiotically simplistic about parenting, as if there is some place where you can parent in a vacuum. So should every NG that has anything to do with children or parenting get cross posted from asCPS? LaVonne wrote alternative forms of discipline As in making child wash off pee with cold water after discovering that happy warm guilt free showers were causing the frequency of wetting at school to INCREASE? (Positive reinforcement of a negative behavior)? Greg can't help but practice his lies. He forced the little girl to take COLD SHOWERS... unhappy cold guilt-ridden showers. sole purpose to rant Whatever you say herr Doktor! YOU, Greg, are the "Doktor." What qualifications do you have to determine that cold showers are the appropriate punishment for someone else's little girl wetting their pants? Especially when YOU could be the reason she's wetting her pants to begin with! What if a psychologist determined that all the little girl needed to stop wetting her pants was for you to get out of her life and out of her home? Did you allow her to see a psych for a professional opinion??? Those who object most strenuously to posts Neal was talking about you, LaVonne! Neal (continued) in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. Yep, that's LaVonne! snip Fern does not post EVERYTHING on both newsgroups, and I suspect that when people cross post things it is often out of excitement or outrage and often perhaps not because spanking is involved. As Neal pointed out, you seem to want to conceal the truth about child abuse agencies and how they actually work. Recently you demanded proof of me for something that was WELL KNOWN, that every state CPS agency had failed Federal Audits for compliance with regulations. Greg, how many times do you ask questions whose answers are already included in the very post that you're responding to? It is crucial to understanding the capricious willy nilly behavior of CPS and therefore the political environment in which a spanking or non-spanking parent may be constrained. Crucial to SOCIAL CONTEXT. Or do you wish to assert that SOCIAL CONTEXT has nothing to do with spanking or not spanking? If you wish to usurp parents rights to choose whether or not to spank, which IS clearly your goal, understanding CPS in the real world as opposed to intent or theory seems germain. You lobby for anti-spanking laws while you naively state that they would not be used for child removals. Any such law would most definately be automatically and broadly be used to remove children to Foster Homes where the kids are 10 TIMES more likely to be sexually abused, and twice as likely to DIE. How do you honestly dare pretend that real world reports about how the Child Protection Industry functions are not totally germain to the anti-spanking laws you advocate? While the Hatch act may not stop you a state paid employee from such lobbying, that lobbying on your part ETHICALLY justifies the presentation of real world information about how CPS works, or more precisely, how CPS would MISUSE the sort of law you are lobbying for. In Summary: You dragged the camels nose into the tent ( with spanking == beating ) ( and proposing new child abuse law! ) ( ignorance of crucial info on failed Audits ) ( naive theory FAR from actual results. ) ( Your expression that it's not political further proves how naive you are. ) Who appointed you to keep pushing your idea of net etiquette? That's bad form. And if any one knows about bad form, it's Greg. He's the king of it. Dan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Is CPS on topic for this NG? From FAQ's
LaVonne wrote
alternative forms of discipline As in making child wash off pee with cold water after discovering that happy warm guilt free showers were causing the frequency of wetting at school to INCREASE? (Positive reinforcement of a negative behavior)? Greg can't help but practice his lies. He forced the little girl to take COLD SHOWERS... unhappy cold guilt-ridden showers. What LIE? What you said and what I said are not mutually exclusive. What are you going to do, remove all the Amish kids too? Or will CPS run around making sure that everybody has a water heater that holds a full 200 gallons so the hot water doesn't run out? A fast cold shower to wash off pee was enough to make her not want to make it a daily event any more. YOU, Greg, are the "Doktor." Nope, I hold no PhD and never pretended I did. Did I LaVonne? What qualifications do you have to determine that cold showers are the appropriate punishment for someone else's little girl wetting their pants? OK, so as usual, in hindsight things could have been done better. You know what "In Loco Parentis" means, Dan? You overlooked the rest of the story, taking it out of context. Tisky Tisky Dan. The showers didn't start out cold, but the kid was liking them so much that it worked as a positive reinforcement of a bad behavior. Not ALL guilt is a bad thing, Dan. Too much or too little guilt can be problematic. Especially when YOU could be the reason she's wetting her pants to begin with! Then why would she do it at school, and why would she honestly volunteer that she knew she had to go, but didn't want to miss out on the big fun in class? Kids DO this, Dan. This is not even a neurological problem. What if a psychologist determined that all the little girl needed to stop wetting her pants was for you to get out of her life and out of her home? Then they would be wrong, because it wasn't even a neurological problem. It was a kid conciously holding it too long, and then losing at the attempt. Perhaps laughing too hard. Did you allow her to see a psych for a professional opinion??? On what, holding their pee? Those who object most strenuously to posts Neal was talking about you, LaVonne! You too, Dan! But you knew that. Recently you demanded proof of me for something that was WELL KNOWN, that every state CPS agency had failed Federal Audits for compliance with regulations. Greg, how many times do you ask questions whose answers are already included in the very post that you're responding to? Well, I'm not the PhD claiming expertise yet ignorant of crucial and BASIC facts about the industry or political situation being discussed. Sure, I screw up. I admit I do. You seem to have some sort of disorder when comes to that. You see such admissions as failings and weakness. I do not. I see them as honesty about human failings. You take human failings and you turn them into something like a political tirade. You seem to cling to an illusion of your own perfection and superiority through my human failings. You seem obsessed with that. For a guy with such a big EGO, that's pretty small. Repeated attempts to shame me, for example. 1st and 2nd time maybe, but the 10th or 30th time your are simply an abusive jackass. I think you are an emotional cripple. With all of your attempts to hurt me I got stronger and more resolute. A long time ago you were hurting yourself more than me, and realized that way too late. Lately you chatter chimp like one liners. Dan, Just like your alter ego Kane, you are your own worst enemy. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Any NZ Shortland street fans? (Yes, it is on topic!) | Cathy | Pregnancy | 6 | July 13th 04 10:20 AM |
Got a hair cut. OT Weight honnesty sort of on topic | Tori M. | Pregnancy | 9 | June 19th 04 04:45 AM |
Not quite on topic, but a plea for help! | Liv Karin Slattebrekk | General | 1 | February 11th 04 12:09 PM |
Online Net safety, I apologise if this is FAQ's or OT | Neil.N | General | 4 | January 12th 04 07:54 AM |
FAQS - alt.parenting.spanking - UPDATED | Doan | Spanking | 0 | July 31st 03 10:46 AM |