When child abuse isn't child abuse?

[andy400]

I've oft wondered, and can come up with theories, but I don't know the answer, by any means. Two things that bother me, and I personally consider to be child abuse, but the law doesn't seem to consider it so:

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

2) Piercing the ears of children too young to have a say in the matter.

Pourquoi?

[andy400]

Tiggsy said:

are you just lashing out to make yourself feel better (that the only reason i can see that i would do it)

OMFG

Which is worse, the fact that you are accusing others of lashing out at their kids 'to make yourself feel better', or admitting that's why you would do it!!??

[andy400]

Tiggsy said:

OMFG? are you under 16...if so, your opinion is biased in this debate!

I am saying i see NO benifit to a smack for the child....i see a benifit to the adult only.

Your post clearly states that the only reason you would hit a child is to make you feel better.

Word it better if you don't want to be picked up for it, old sport!

[andy400]

Tiggsy said:

andy400 said:

Tiggsy said:

OMFG? are you under 16...if so, your opinion is biased in this debate!

I am saying i see NO benifit to a smack for the child....i see a benifit to the adult only.

Your post clearly states that the only reason you would hit a child is to make you feel better.

Word it better if you don't want to be picked up for it, old sport!

i worded it right. i see NO reason to hit a child OTHER than to feel better myself..to vent. On that basis, the only thing to be gained from hitting them would be that...for me. I dont hit them much because i dont feel the need to put my need to vent ahead of hurting them.

You worded it right?? Bloody hell.

Backing away slowly from this disturbing discussion........

[andy400]

DrTre said:

Back to the OP though...I can certainly see your point but, playing devils avocado, could it not be taken by some as "nanny state interference"? Where does that label begin and end?

Could be seen as that, true. I guess it would be difficult to enforce or prosecute the over-feeding or the smoking whilst pregnant deals, but making holes in small children who can't even speak to object is fairly black and white IMO.

[andy400]

Justayellowbadge said:

Cas_P said:

edit: and toddlers/babies with peirced ears, tacky, very tacky.

To us, yes, agreed. But it's the norm in some cultures - the Spanish would pierce a baby's ears during labour if they had the chance.

Being a 'cultural' thing does not make it right! Female circumcision anyone? Or, frankly, male circumcision on babies while we're at it!!

[andy400]

Justayellowbadge said:

andy400 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

Cas_P said:

edit: and toddlers/babies with peirced ears, tacky, very tacky.

To us, yes, agreed. But it's the norm in some cultures - the Spanish would pierce a baby's ears during labour if they had the chance.

Being a 'cultural' thing does not make it right! Female circumcision anyone? Or, frankly, male circumcision on babies while we're at it!!

I didn't say it was. I agreed it was tacky.

Just pointing out that others might see it differently.

Roger!