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
|
|||
|
|||
Spanking Debate (Flame-free)
My position is: -- Spanking is not necessary. -- Spanking is harmful. -- Any child can be raised well without spanking. -- Spanking tends to cause worse behaviour in the long run. If anyone is interested in debating any of these points without posting personal insults, I invite you to read my article "Reasons not to spank children" on my web page http://www.ncf.ca/~an588/par_home.html, as my opening arguments in the debate, and then reply in this thread with your own position and arguments. If you're one of the people who has posted personal insults in reply to my posts in the past, please include a statement that you are willing to participate in a debate without posting insults. -- Cathy |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Since at least 94% of humanity, has been raised with at least one swat, the
whole question is somewhat pointless. Spanking is NOT the best altenative. It should not be used first. It should not be used routinely. Talk, diversion, distraction, and education are much better tactics. However, we live in a society where CPS has run amuck. That reminds me, I shall post the latest on MSBP with CAS in Ontario. A true example of government interference making a situation worse. May I remind you that those who are most verbally abusive, use hate speech when referring to females are those who rail most against spanking and who salute and welcome the faceless bureaucrats into the family situation. And you know to whom I refer, Catherine. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Catherine,
I agree 100% with your position and don't believe many would disagree with it. I'm glad you are posting in an attempt to spark open and honest dialogue--something that has been missing for several years on this n.g. It would be nice to set up some rules, etc..to give this discussion some boundaries. I would like to see parents revisit and seek honest/open feedback and not be run off when they speak their minds. This should have been a place they could come for help, support, advise and education on the use of C.P. not the propaganda forum it currently is. Where my position differs from the "cohorts" is in the process. I support educating parents to use more appropriate forms of child management while they would outlaw and punish families through statutes fuzzing the line of abuse and further alienating those that need to be brought into this discussion the most. Thanks for trying to open this up! Non-spanker by choice, Chris C. TX |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Top Post to Chris C and Catherine:
And to echo what Chris C has said and to bolster my supposition that CPS not CP in the US has harmed families more than helped them. CPS officially began as a Government institution in 74. Funded by the need to curb drug abuses and to stop the *battered child syndrome.* Since then, the US has seen increasing, not lessening, reports of child abuse being called into the Hotlines. All classes of folks have been harassed, and unfairly targeted. As Chris C suggested, I support Preschool education to involve families and the community into more cooperative modes of child rearing. I believe most parents want what is BEST for their children. Truly. However, the government has cut funding for Head Start (which is proven to be effective in low-income areas). There are all kinds of innovative programs which the Feds could implement to improve early childhood education, which would also have the effect of giving a child a safe, stable relationship with a preschool teacher, should he be in a dangerous home situation. Parents can be required to work within the program and form relationships with other Moms and Dads. Instead, we continue to fund foster care (legislative inertia) and make it difficult for KIN to foster their own. See Washington state grass roots organizations, for example. CPS is a blunt tool, which has inspired massive disrespect for the government and for case workers. Spanking is not the best alternative. Children should have limits, but first they need a safe place to play and stimulating environments. I do not know if you are familiar with some inner-city neighborhoods, but the local school may be the ONLY SAFE place for children to come together. Parents can learn alternative behavior modifying techniques with children while cutting out stars for bulletin boards. The US legislative bodies have funded massive government programs---indeed, CPS took 3M reports in 96. Less than 1/3 of these were substantiated. However, Head Start and Early Head Start have been shown to carry forth long-lasting academic success. CPS is an outmoded institution. Education is certainly better than edict. http://www.familyrightsassociation.com Chris C and Catherine wrote: Subject: Spanking Debate (Flame-free) From: "cdc0038" Date: 9/7/2004 11:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: boutparenting.com Catherine, I agree 100% with your position and don't believe many would disagree with it. I'm glad you are posting in an attempt to spark open and honest dialogue--something that has been missing for several years on this n.g. It would be nice to set up some rules, etc..to give this discussion some boundaries. I would like to see parents revisit and seek honest/open feedback and not be run off when they speak their minds. This should have been a place they could come for help, support, advise and education on the use of C.P. not the propaganda forum it currently is. Where my position differs from the "cohorts" is in the process. I support educating parents to use more appropriate forms of child management while they would outlaw and punish families through statutes fuzzing the line of abuse and further alienating those that need to be brought into this discussion the most. Thanks for trying to open this up! Non-spanker by choice, Chris C. TX |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On 12 Sep 2004 14:25:31 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:
.......more nonsense and lies............. Top Post to Chris C and Catherine: And to echo what Chris C has said and to bolster my supposition that CPS not CP in the US has harmed families more than helped them. Nonsense. They have saved children's lives, and childhoods. CPS officially began as a Government institution in 74. Cihld protection has been around since the late 1800's, with considerable action taken in the early 1900's. You are full of nonsense as usual. Children of poor families that could not support them and keep them safe (neglect issues) were in institutions long before that...government institutions as well as private charitable ones. My own paternal grandmother, whose mother died and whose father was an out of work miner left her in just such an institution, from where she was adopted by a well known Nebraska family involved in the burgeoning oil exploration business. Lucky kid...they spoiled her pretty much. She grew up to have five very successful children of her own, my aunt, uncles an father. We are very aware of her history and the politics of child welfare. Institutionalizing children became a hot political issue during the Roosevelt administration..the first one. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl..._16108108/pg_2 "A shift in policy preference from institutions to family homes took place during the Progressive Era. This shift is probably best exemplified by Theodore Roosevelt's proclamation at the first White House Conference on Children in 1909 that "Home life is the highest and finest product of civilization. Children should not be denied it except for urgent and compelling reasons."(24) For some children, living with widowed mothers, direct relief became the policy of choice of progressive social workers. For other children, placement in "boarding homes" and "free homes" (roughly the equivalents of modern day foster care) increasingly became the preferred policy, in keeping with the deinstitutionalization movement that had earlier sought to remove children from almshouses.(25) " This led to a formalized foster care system being instituted. But even prior to that there were systems in the US: http://www.nfpainc.org/aboutFP/FC_history.cfm?page=2 Here's a small piece of the actual history, instead of your ignorant ranting: "As a result of the New York Children's Aid Society's placements, sectarian social agencies and state governments became involved in foster home placements. Three states led the movement. Massachusetts, prior to 1865, began paying board to families who took care of children too young to be indentured. Pennsylvania passed the first licensing law in 1885 which made it a misdemeanor to care for two or more unrelated children without a license. South Dakota began providing subsidies to the Children's Home Society after it was organized in 1893 for its public child care work. During the early 1900's, social agencies began to supervise foster parents. Records were kept, children's individual needs were considered when placements were made, and the federal government began supporting state inspections of family foster homes. Services were provided to natural families to enable the child to return home and foster parents were now seen as part of a professional team working to find permanency for dependent children." Notice the early government involvement? Funded by the need to curb drug abuses and to stop the *battered child syndrome.* Nonsense. You continue your asshole assumptoins. States could not do a damn thing, for instance, about the "drug abuses" fetuses, until the mid 1990's when the first laws on that issue were passed. CPS has always been an after the fact inforcement agency. The only preabuse interventions would be because of a sibling intervention that curbed abuse of others in the household by rehabilitating the parents. Put up some proof of your claims....no, it's obvious you won't. Since then, the US has seen increasing, not lessening, reports of child abuse being called into the Hotlines. In the begining people were not accustomed to making such calls, thinking still, as in the past, that these things were better left to the families to solve on their own. Increasing isolation from the growing mobility of citizens, cut that notion off, as most young folks left for distant parts and began families. It finally became apparent to the public that the abused and neglected child only really had only one advocate.....the individual witnessing citizen. Many of them parents themselves, and some even the parents of the parents that were the perps. The other increases were attributable to the growing drug problem....and the ever-present, but larger population increasing, alchohol problem. Today one can find meth and meth cookers everywhere, from highrise upper class condos, to the family suburbs, to the farm and rural and even woods and deserts of this country...nowhere lacks them. I've seen dealing and production going on in places as remote as Sitka Alaska, where they are found even on boats, to the swank yuppy reaches of Queen Anne hill in Seattle, da hood in Phoenix along with Mesa and Scottsdale -- the wealthiest area in that region, Oakland, South Sacramento, and West LA, along with Laguna and even Palm Springs. This country is awash in drugs, of all kinds. No one is immune or safe from it and its harm...and YOU want to cut funding to CPS. All classes of folks have been harassed, and unfairly targeted. Bull****... all classes of folks abuse and neglect their children. How do you "unfairly" target "all classes" you silly propaganda spouting piece of ****? As Chris C suggested, I support Preschool education to involve families and the community into more cooperative modes of child rearing. Abusive and neglectful families do not involved their children in preschool programs. That would would be, by you, an ignorant oxymoron. I believe most parents want what is BEST for their children. Truly. Well big yahoo for you. Who ever said they didn't? Of course MOST do, but that leaves the strong possibility that something up to 49% might not, and proof of some percentage that don't, and are caught at it. And a small percentage that have no idea they are injuring their children. However, the government has cut funding for Head Start (which is proven to be effective in low-income areas). As early as 1999, sufficient deficiencies noted in the three types of Head Start programs by mandated monitoring showed that Information Fiscal year 1999 compliance monitoring, percent of Grantees (programs) with deficiencies: Head Start Only 18% (yet only 19% of those were terminated) Early Head Start Only 13% Head Start & Early Head Start (combined Grantee) 14% Does that look like success to you, Yew? Hell, those scores would be worse than the ones states were seen to have "failed" the federal program evaluations for child protection. Then there's this: http://www.cato.org/research/educati...headstart.html "Consider the views of child-development scholar Edward Zigler, a founder of Head Start. As far back as 1987, when educators were debating the merits of universal preschool, he warned, "This is not the first time universal preschool education has been proposed…[In the past], as now, the arguments in favor of preschool education were that it would reduce school failure, lower dropout rates, increase test scores, and produce a generation of more competent high school graduates….Preschool education will achieve none of these results." What Zigler recognized is that a child's academic and personal growth turn on a lot more than preschool. Family, natural abilities, neighborhood, and life experiences easily outweigh the influence of preschool. Preschools may teach children how to count, follow directions, and get along; Zigler himself favors universal preschool as a means to achieve school readiness. But preschool alone, like Head Start alone, confers no lasting advantage. To put all children on an equal footing would require genetic engineering, surrogate parents, and for many kids, home away from home." And from the same source (we've known for a very long time that Head Start was a boondogle make work program with poor to no results): "In 1985 the Department of Health and Human Services undertook the first meta-analysis of Head Start research and shook the establishment with its dire findings: "In the long run, cognitive and socioemotional test scores of former Head Start students do not remain superior to those of disadvantaged children who did not attend Head Start." In other words, Head Start was a false start--the net gain to children was zero. " And: "The most recent and thorough analysis of Head Start was conducted by the non-partisan General Accounting Office in 1997. After reviewing more than 600 citations, manuscripts, and studies, GAO concluded, "The body of research on current Head Start is insufficient to draw conclusions about the impact of the national program." In a sense, the GAO is right: sloppy study designs and amateur methodological errors so riddle the literature that any claims about the success or failure of the program are not convincing. Given that, one might suggest that more research is needed before giving up on the program. On the other hand, one might also look for guidance from other programs that bear a striking resemblance to Head Start. On this, findings are conclusive: early intervention programs can boost children's test scores, but those gains wash out within a few years of exiting the programs. " Bleeding heart liberals are one of the most divisive and destructive forces in society....this has been so for millinea, and will likely be so for the rest of human history...which will be damn short if we keep letting you twits get into power. There are all kinds of innovative programs which the Feds could implement to improve early childhood education, Notice what Ed Zigler, one of the originators of the Head Start program said? It doesn't do what the public thinks it does. which would also have the effect of giving a child a safe, stable relationship with a preschool teacher, should he be in a dangerous home situation. 24/7? Please, dimwit. As usual, the liberal self delusion....fact dysfunctional, where it's not entirely absent. Parents can be required to work within the program The CAN? In the United States? According to the Constitution and Amendments? Legally? Come now. And with the liberal fascists wanting MORE government control over families they will do so BY REQUIREMENT, only two ways....by enforced attendance, and by classes in the penitentary. The rest of us won't volunteer. That's just how Americans are. and form relationships with other Moms and Dads. Hell, they have them already. The get together sometimes nightly for Blow parties. Instead, we continue to fund foster care (legislative inertia) and make it difficult for KIN to foster their own. Going to go for the Big Lie, I see. Well, commence. It gives me such pleasure to provide facts...to actually educate, as opposed to your propaganda. See Washington state grass roots organizations, for example. RR R R ...have you not been reading my posted replies to your nonsense the past few days, or is your only possible comeback because your are lying and the facts are not as you claim, to simply repeat the lie? Of course it is. From my message or: http://tinyurl.com/5m3sq "Interested in the truth? Let's see: http://www.aasa.dshs.wa.gov/topics/c...inshipcare.htm And instead of a lying little tag line, I'll give you the entire page quoted verbatim: According to the 2000 Census, 86,000 children in Washington State live in households with grandparents and other relatives with or without their parents present. An estimated 35,806 grandparents are the primary caregivers for their grandchildren living with them. Thirty-eight support groups for relatives raising children exist in our state. In 1988, Washington State/Aging and Adult Services Administration received a RAPP (Relatives as Parents Program) State Initiative Grant from the Brookdale Foundation. For the past seven years; a Governor's Proclamation has been issued for Grandparents and Relatives Raising Children Day. The RAPP website, a collaborative effort between Aging and Adult Services Administration and the Cooperative Extension-Washington State University, is located at http://parenting.wsu.edu/relative/index.htm " CPS is a blunt tool, No, police and criminal investigations and convictions are the "blunt tool." CPS is a social service agency. One with the intent of reunifying families, which it does to the tune of 60% of those children removed from families, and a considerable number receiving in-home services that are not ever removed. If this were not so, and CPS was a "blunt tool" then there would be no listing of so many reunification and preservations programs for child welfare, the majority administered and delivered by CPS and their "jacklegs" at: http://nccanch.acf.hhs.gov/topics/responding/inhome.cfm which has inspired massive disrespect for the government and for case workers. You are absolutely correct, except for one tiny little point, that is of course, the fine example of a tool and lie of propagandists so profigately use....the "misleading qualifier:" in this case the lie, "massive." There is no more than a relatively small group out of the huge population of the United States, that has such views. The majority of Americans abhor child abuse and neglect.....these honorable and better informed folks know that many things have been tried, and even when conditions are good for a reduction WITHOUT SPECIAL programs, abuse and neglect just keeps sailing along. They also suspect, as I do, and scientists keep showing strong connects to, that child abuse and neglect leads to later crime and mental illnes, including in the form of developmental dysfunctions....reducing the quality of life for children for their rest of their days. This stealing from the child, and from the society by crippling the child, is unacceptable to responsible, humane, and thoughtful citizens. CPS is nothing more than a institutional tool, created by the citizen electorate through legal means....as all our government institutions are. Spanking is not the best alternative. It's not even an acceptable alternative to people who think their way through intelligently to a simple risk assessment. It's impossible to accurately calculate the risks to the child of hitting them with any chance of even coming close to understanding the risks. Medical science makes it clear that the shock of impact trauma is a very tricky business. And far too many parents fail in this, and escalate in force, increments, and duration and do permanent harm...resulting in sometimes drawing CPS attention (as this society intends) and either losing their chilren or wising up. Children should have limits, Nothing is easier if one does not have control freak issues as you twits appear to. Children want to learn and cooperative with people that cooperate with their need to learn. but first they need a safe place to play and stimulating environments. Tell me about it. YOU would create more hellholes, as would douggie, by trying to remove CPS from the picture with funding cuts and other previously unmanded limits, ...and unneeded limits, and moving the bar on government intervention to the level of criminal harm to the child. Any one that can actually think, rather than get others to do it for them, can sort through that and see where the huge holes are...in terms of damage to children. One could get away with a great deal before they met the criminal limits level...that IS why we have civil law as well as criminal law. And it is correct and senseible that child welfare come under both. I do not know if you are familiar with some inner-city neighborhoods, but the local school may be the ONLY SAFE place for children to come together. R R R R....yeah, the 'bangers'' love it there. No one is allowed to carry guns. The children are terrified to report them, when they do carry guns and other weapons, and this is in exactly those areas where homelife is the worst....inner-city neighborhoods, and YOU AND YOUR CRONIES WANT TO DESTROY THE REAL SAFE PLACE for these children....the temporary foster care and state custody while things are sorted out. Parents can learn alternative behavior modifying techniques with children while cutting out stars for bulletin boards. Is there ANY response I could make to that that would not send myself and others into paroxisms of laughter? Abusive and neglectful parents are by definition NOT available for such learning. There, I did it with out laughing. The US legislative bodies have funded massive government programs---indeed, CPS took 3M reports in 96. Ah, yeah, that's about right... Less than 1/3 of these were substantiated. Yep, which includes not even any intervention...no investigation, just a polite, "thanks" and a dial tone. Of those investigated I'd say 1/3 being substantiated is a horror...for children. That is a MILLION SUSTANTIATED CHILD ABUSES IN A YEAR. . And that goes on and on and on. And children are in pain. Do YOU know pain? Can you project yourself into their situation....NO escape from it....unless someone reports, some professional, some neighbor, some family or relative? Now THAT is living hell. And you and your asshole buddies are headed to making MORE of it for children. However, Head Start and Early Head Start have been shown to carry forth long-lasting academic success. Oh....well, no big deal. And it doesn't cover kids 24/7. And only about 60% of the eligible children actually are enrolled. No big deal. Let's fund IT (which won't change a single thing in terms of outcomes, or enrollments) and defund CPS, that battles the hell of child abuse successfully every single day. CPS is an outmoded institution. You are outmoded, Fertilizer Breath. Education is certainly better than edict. Completely unrelated analogy. Enforced education is exactly what CPS is about....and there is no way to make abusive or neglectful parents attend...and they don't, unless forced. Prove me wrong. familyrightsassociation.com Shilling again. So tell us, what's your pay per hit, or are you on straight commission...each time you find an excuse to post their URL you get how much? As for the below....Chris C. hasn't posted open and honest dialogue for the three years I've observed posts in this ng. In fact Chris C's signature line, "Non-spanker by choice," is a classic dishonest claim...as Chris C has no children to make the choice about. Typical of you compulsive liars, and compulsive spanker or spanking advocates....you can't even lie well. Mental and psychological incompetents. Kane Chris C and Catherine wrote: Subject: Spanking Debate (Flame-free) From: "cdc0038" Date: 9/7/2004 11:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: aboutparenting.com Catherine, I agree 100% with your position and don't believe many would disagree with it. I'm glad you are posting in an attempt to spark open and honest dialogue--something that has been missing for several years on this n.g. It would be nice to set up some rules, etc..to give this discussion some boundaries. I would like to see parents revisit and seek honest/open feedback and not be run off when they speak their minds. This should have been a place they could come for help, support, advise and education on the use of C.P. not the propaganda forum it currently is. Where my position differs from the "cohorts" is in the process. I support educating parents to use more appropriate forms of child management while they would outlaw and punish families through statutes fuzzing the line of abuse and further alienating those that need to be brought into this discussion the most. Thanks for trying to open this up! Non-spanker by choice, Chris C. TX |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Foster Parents | 3 | December 8th 03 11:53 PM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |