When child abuse isn't child abuse?

[ShadownINja]

Over-feeding a child so they are fatter than the average kid. We're not talking about BMI or bodyfat percentages. You know when a kid is overweight.

[Tiggsy]

asbo said:

Tiggsy said:

chippy17 said:

smacking; the lack of smacking/'clip round the ear' is part of what has turned our children into disaffected disrespectful oiks

no it's not.....THINK it through.

there are plenty of middle class families that dont smack and the kids are fine. Mine are hardly ever smacked, and i mean almost never, and they are fine.......however, you go and find some of these nasty "oiks" you refer to and i'll bet they HAVE been smacked - in fact, i would suggest the level of smacking rises as the quality of the kids on the streets falls.......all smacking does is teaches kids that hitting out is an acceptable punishment. It's primary benefit to the adult is to make them feel better/vent. Go talk to some of the knife carrying thugs on the street and the odds are they have seen the business end of their dads/stepdads/mums boyfrineds belt plenty!

I think many will disagree with that.

No doubt, many people are mistaken about all sorts of things!

However, the reality is that MANY people will state they dont smack their kids and they are fine (me, for one)....so anyone saying they do smack their kids and they are fine is in a potentially pointless group of opinions - they could also say they feed the kids pasta and they are fine so it must be the pasta. It's the same daft notion of "i was smacked and i'm ok"....so what? Are you saying that if you werent smacked you be a hoodie????

However, what you find is many people saying "i didnt smack my kids and now they are little sts"....in contrast, it's no secret that theres a link between violence in the home and being violent....to assume that when the violence is wound down theres a sudden cut off at which point it no longer affects people is naive at best.

[Cara Van Man]

Tiggsy said:

asbo said:

Tiggsy said:

chippy17 said:

smacking; the lack of smacking/'clip round the ear' is part of what has turned our children into disaffected disrespectful oiks

no it's not.....THINK it through.

there are plenty of middle class families that dont smack and the kids are fine. Mine are hardly ever smacked, and i mean almost never, and they are fine.......however, you go and find some of these nasty "oiks" you refer to and i'll bet they HAVE been smacked - in fact, i would suggest the level of smacking rises as the quality of the kids on the streets falls.......all smacking does is teaches kids that hitting out is an acceptable punishment. It's primary benefit to the adult is to make them feel better/vent. Go talk to some of the knife carrying thugs on the street and the odds are they have seen the business end of their dads/stepdads/mums boyfrineds belt plenty!

I think many will disagree with that.

No doubt, many people are mistaken about all sorts of things!

However, the reality is that MANY people will state they dont smack their kids and they are fine (me, for one)....so anyone saying they do smack their kids and they are fine is in a potentially pointless group of opinions - they could also say they feed the kids pasta and they are fine so it must be the pasta. It's the same daft notion of "i was smacked and i'm ok"....so what? Are you saying that if you werent smacked you be a hoodie????

However, what you find is many people saying "i didnt smack my kids and now they are little sts"....in contrast, it's no secret that theres a link between violence in the home and being violent....to assume that when the violence is wound down theres a sudden cut off at which point it no longer affects people is naive at best.

i tried to read that and it doesn't make any sense.

[asbo]

Cara Van Man said:

Tiggsy said:

asbo said:

Tiggsy said:

chippy17 said:

smacking; the lack of smacking/'clip round the ear' is part of what has turned our children into disaffected disrespectful oiks

no it's not.....THINK it through.

there are plenty of middle class families that dont smack and the kids are fine. Mine are hardly ever smacked, and i mean almost never, and they are fine.......however, you go and find some of these nasty "oiks" you refer to and i'll bet they HAVE been smacked - in fact, i would suggest the level of smacking rises as the quality of the kids on the streets falls.......all smacking does is teaches kids that hitting out is an acceptable punishment. It's primary benefit to the adult is to make them feel better/vent. Go talk to some of the knife carrying thugs on the street and the odds are they have seen the business end of their dads/stepdads/mums boyfrineds belt plenty!

I think many will disagree with that.

No doubt, many people are mistaken about all sorts of things!

However, the reality is that MANY people will state they dont smack their kids and they are fine (me, for one)....so anyone saying they do smack their kids and they are fine is in a potentially pointless group of opinions - they could also say they feed the kids pasta and they are fine so it must be the pasta. It's the same daft notion of "i was smacked and i'm ok"....so what? Are you saying that if you werent smacked you be a hoodie????

However, what you find is many people saying "i didnt smack my kids and now they are little sts"....in contrast, it's no secret that theres a link between violence in the home and being violent....to assume that when the violence is wound down theres a sudden cut off at which point it no longer affects people is naive at best.

i tried to read that and it doesn't make any sense.

Ditto. Also, to suggest that the odd smack is 'toned down violence' is rather presumptious.

[ShadownINja]

Try pressure point techniques. Maximum pain, minimum effort, no marks.

[Tiggsy]

asbo said:

Ditto. Also, to suggest that the odd smack is 'toned down violence' is rather presumptious.

In simple form (for those beaten as children and now punch drunk)

Mr A hits his kids and says "thats why they are fine"

Mr B does not and says "but so are mine"

So who's to say that A's kids are ok BECAUSE he wacks them? B's are fine, maybe A's would have been as well....maybe it's about a lot more than what A does with his smacking that shapes his children?

Now...onto to little sts that hang out on street corners and drag the country down......do you think these kids have NOT been smacked? Get real, this type of kid gets more smacks than anyone - so there goes the spare the rod, spare the scrote theory.


and.....a smack is toned down violence - to suggest otherwise is nuts. If i smack you in the steet with mild force (as you may smack a child) i would be arrested......if i nothing but increase the force of that smack i would eventually end up in prision and if done hard enough, kill you. I'm not saying smacking is child abuse - as i said before, i'd happily smack if i belived it worked.....but i am saying a smack is the same thing as voilence , just done gentler. (you dont belive me, go give a cop "red legs" and see how long you last!

Edited by Tiggsy on Friday 12th June 12:19

[BlackVanGirl]

Ganglandboss said:

Fittster said:

andy400 said:

1) Smoking whilst obviously pregnant. Could also apply to heavy drinking.

So you don't want her smoking or drinking because it damages the babies health. What about having an abortion, which doesn't do the baby much good?

That is a completely different matter. An abortion is final and will not affect a child's quality of life. There are laws on when terminations can be carried that prevent them being carried out when the foetus has developed more into a person. Whether you agree with it or not is a contentious issue but not relevant to this topic IMO. Heavy smoking / drinking / drug abuse during pegnancy can cause health problems for the child after birth.

Unless it might turn out to be disabled - even mildly - in which case all bets are off and doctors will agree to abort up to term. (At least) two new PH babies this year would fall within this provision.

[Famous Graham]

Tiggsy said:

Mine are hardly ever smacked, and i mean almost never

Tiggsy said:

However, the reality is that MANY people will state they dont smack their kids and they are fine (me, for one)

Errm...so which is it?

[Cara Van Man]

ShadownINja said:

Try pressure point techniques. Maximum pain, minimum effort, no marks.

<grabs 5 year old daughter by throat>

[chippy17]

Cara Van Man said:

Tiggsy said:

asbo said:

Tiggsy said:

chippy17 said:

smacking; the lack of smacking/'clip round the ear' is part of what has turned our children into disaffected disrespectful oiks

no it's not.....THINK it through.

there are plenty of middle class families that dont smack and the kids are fine. Mine are hardly ever smacked, and i mean almost never, and they are fine.......however, you go and find some of these nasty "oiks" you refer to and i'll bet they HAVE been smacked - in fact, i would suggest the level of smacking rises as the quality of the kids on the streets falls.......all smacking does is teaches kids that hitting out is an acceptable punishment. It's primary benefit to the adult is to make them feel better/vent. Go talk to some of the knife carrying thugs on the street and the odds are they have seen the business end of their dads/stepdads/mums boyfrineds belt plenty!

I think many will disagree with that.

No doubt, many people are mistaken about all sorts of things!

However, the reality is that MANY people will state they dont smack their kids and they are fine (me, for one)....so anyone saying they do smack their kids and they are fine is in a potentially pointless group of opinions - they could also say they feed the kids pasta and they are fine so it must be the pasta. It's the same daft notion of "i was smacked and i'm ok"....so what? Are you saying that if you werent smacked you be a hoodie????

However, what you find is many people saying "i didnt smack my kids and now they are little sts"....in contrast, it's no secret that theres a link between violence in the home and being violent....to assume that when the violence is wound down theres a sudden cut off at which point it no longer affects people is naive at best.

i tried to read that and it doesn't make any sense.

why can't people see the difference, i was in no way advocating beating a child up and there is a difference between the odd clip round the ear and child abuse but as a society we have gone too far the other way, I cannot remember the last time I smacked either of my two, but if they were seriously out of order I would consider it and believe me the VERY few times I have done it sorted the problem out there and then

[Sheets Tabuer]

Indoctrinating a child into a religion he doesn't understnd and doesn't make the free choice to join.

[Tiggsy]

Famous Graham said:

Tiggsy said:

Mine are hardly ever smacked, and i mean almost never

Tiggsy said:

However, the reality is that MANY people will state they dont smack their kids and they are fine (me, for one)

Errm...so which is it?

they have all been smacked at some point in their lives, but only as a vent for me - it was never as a conscious attempt to punish or develop them, because i dont believe that works.

however, the rarity of these events mean my kids do not regard a smack as a likely result of misbehavior....so it doenst shape how they act or who they are.

my daughter - who is a teen - would regard the risk of a smack if she were to tell me to go fk myself as being staggeringly unlikely (i doubt she'd even consider it anymore than i'd consider i'd be smacked if i told someone with authority over me the same thing) However, she is aware of what WOULD happen...and so she wouldnt do it (same as i wouldnt, for the same reason.

In fact, i'd say the only viable time to smack a child is when they are very young (if yu are going to at all) The second they understand you it ceases to be the best action IMO....certainly smacking a kid between 3/4 and adult is daft (interestingly, i expect mine would OPT for a smack if they thought it was on the table as an alternative to a proper punishment!)

[Tiggsy]

chippy17 said:

there is a difference between the odd clip round the ear and child abuse

sorry - lost me. What is the reality of a clip round the ear? you flick their ear? you smack thier head? what is the exact action you are suggesting?

if my boys were badly behaved and looking at a punishment i'm not sure "clipping their ear" would do much???? what do you think it would achive?

[Tiggsy]

chippy17 said:

but if they were seriously out of order I would consider it and believe me the VERY few times I have done it sorted the problem out there and then

so you felt it was the best action in that case? if so, why not just use it for all issues....just hit less hard for less severe problems? or do you keep it on reserve in the belief your kids wont do certain things on the basis to do so would result in you hitting them?

Edited by Tiggsy on Friday 12th June 12:39

[Tiggsy]

Sheets Tabuer said:

Indoctrinating a child into a religion he doesn't understnd and doesn't make the free choice to join.

how is santa and the tooth fairy any different? you lie to kids because you belive they get more out of the lie than they would the truth. the only difference with the church is the grown up belives the lie...but the kids cant tell that difference.

[dave_s13]

ShadownINja said:

Over-feeding a child so they are fatter than the average kid. We're not talking about BMI or bodyfat percentages. You know when a kid is overweight.

I've spoken to a couple of dieticians (proper NHS ones) that think this should be classed as child abuse. So, your not wrong there.

One thing I'm going to try very hard at with our young un is to make sure she eats well and is NOT a fatty.

[Tiggsy]

dave_s13 said:

not wrong there.

One thing I'm going to try very hard at with our young un is to make sure she eats well and is NOT a fatty.

Girls are easy....just say "oh, you're looking pretty fat lately" she'll be on salad for pack lunch before you know it

[Sheets Tabuer]

I have never been able to bring myself to smack my son, I was smacked as a child, well I say smacked my mother would flip out and beat me with the nearest thing she could find and would only stop when it broke or I stopped moving.

I just couldn't inflict pain on my son and I know it is a cliché but it would hurt me more than him.

I find guidance and patience worked a hell of a whole lot better and also telling him when he has done wrong that you don't want him to be around you at the moment because he has upset you, that is the killer that is what gets his attention.

It is worse at the moment beacuse he is taking a number of drugs and steroids so he gets very angry at the slightest thing but I have to be calm, have patience and wait for him to calm before talking to him, it really works a hell of a lot better than assaulting my son.

[Dr_Gonzo]

Tiggsy said:

Sheets Tabuer said:

Indoctrinating a child into a religion he doesn't understnd and doesn't make the free choice to join.

how is santa and the tooth fairy any different? you lie to kids because you belive they get more out of the lie than they would the truth. the only difference with the church is the grown up belives the lie...but the kids cant tell that difference.

Because Santa and the Tooth Fairly are a bit of harmless fun. Religion is not. Religion can deeply affect a person's entire life. AFAIK there's no groups of people killing each other over whether Santa prefers mince pies or fruit cake.

[Tiggsy]

Dr_Gonzo said:

Because Santa and the Tooth Fairly are a bit of harmless fun. Religion is not. Religion can deeply affect a person's entire life. AFAIK there's no groups of people killing each other over whether Santa prefers mince pies or fruit cake.

plenty of people would say their lives are deeply affected to the better though....lots of happy christians about!

and the "religion starts the wars" theory is a bit of leap as a good reason to keep your kid out of church! My gran was religious, she never killed anyone though (that i know of)