You have probably heard the expression, "Spare the rod, spoil the child." Do you agree with it? Perhaps you were spanked as a kid. Was it appropriate? Some people see spanking as an outdated method of punishment or even child abuse, while others view a swat on the bottom as a parent's prerogative. Where do we draw the line when it comes to disciplining our children?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
It's hitting that is illegal. I love the link you attached as it's very informative, I learned new stuff. Thanks.
This should be mentioned about these States that banned corporal punishment (Using the swiss as an example):
"The Swiss supreme court ruled in July 2003 that parents have a limited right to smack their children. Anything beyond an occasional smack will constitute a criminal offense the court said."
Also, I lived in Peru for awhile and travelled to Chile quite a lot and though Chile is in the list.....they certainly spank their kids there! :-)
(more on the link you submitted: http://www.stophitting.com/laws/legalReform.php )
- reb412 August 30, 2008 8:52PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Chances are since the law in Chile just went into effect recently, you were probably there when spanking was still legal.When the law went into effect in Sweden in 1979, 90% of Swedish parents believed in spanking. Now almost 30 years later, 90% of Swedish parents do not believe in spanking children. Give the law a chance. You should not expect miracles to happen overnight. We don't abolish laws against murder just because murders still occur. Any lowering of the rate of children being hit or abused is a step in the right direction.
- edwin p
August 31, 2008 7:08PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
I guess semantics and definitions are where the lines get blurred.
"Now almost 30 years later, 90% of Swedish parents do not believe in spanking children."
Do they not believe in spanking or do they not believe it's right to hit a child?
I don't believe it's right to hit a child....but I believe that spanking is different than "striking" or "hitting" a child.
It seems that a lot of these laws passed in the EU make a distinction between the two (as they still allow for spanking...swatting...or whatever you want to call it). So that's why I ask. If 90% of the parents say they do not believe in "spanking" it could be semantics as they might still "swat" their children (as the law states they are allowed).
- reb412 August 31, 2008 7:47PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
I think that what is meant in the EU Laws is the fact that the law is not going to prosecute every single little tap on the wrist. Also, parents are allowed to grab children to pull them away from danger such as speeding cars and hot stoves. The purpose of the law is to control parents who can't control themselves and then turn around and use the Law as a nursemaid to try and keep them out of trouble. In other words, before they hit a child, they should think twice and not expect the law to bail them out if they go too far. Under our proposed Canadian Law, all cases would have to go through the Attorney General which would act as a filter to prevent parents from being prosecuted for frivilous reasons and thus assuring that only cases with merit would ever see the inside of a courtroom.
- edwin p September 1, 2008 3:50PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Yes that does make sense. I do still emphasize that someone who is striking their child (out of impulse, anger, etc.) is not "really" spanking. But protection should probably be offered for things such as you mentioned. I am curious what the stats are on what level of income, types of families, etc. that the most child abuse occurs in.
One of the things I'm worried about with passing this type of law is the enforcement of it. Everyone has a different definition of discipline and if a neighbor has an extreme view of "child abuse" (for instance...my neighbor thinks it's a form of mental abuse to say "no" to a child in a raised tone) than you're going to have parents calling in and accusing ridiculous things because they define it differently.
- reb412 September 1, 2008 5:25PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
3
2
8
7
6
8
5
5
1
2
2
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
The Debate Over the State
- From Anonymous Expert
By Anonymous Expert - Parenting Expert
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Slippery Slope Fallacy
Rosemond commits what is known as "The Slippery Slope Fallacy", by assuming that if the state forbids hitting children, then it will pass more regulations until it has overwhelming control. By this reasoning, if the state continues to forbid hitting your neighbor, then it will pass more regulations until it has overwhelming control.
- Greg1 August 7, 2008 6:36AM
Reply to this Recommend (3)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
government interference
If there is a separation of church and state, there should be a separation of state and parent/child relationships unless the relationship is unhealthy and is causing harm to either the parent or child.
As for, "bureaucracy will seek to expand itself, as all bureaucracies do", I agree. Those who are given something, want more and more of it. If the state can already control activities we do or don't do at work and school, why should they have control of what we do at home? If the state is controlling the method of discipline a parent is using with their child then the state and not the parent is controlling the development of that individual. Even though government interference is not a bad thing for some families since the parents are unfit to take care of their children in a safe manner, those parents probably shouldn't have had kids in the first place.
- krispy
February 15, 2009 11:12AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
It's pretty simple...
If you hit an adult, it would be considered assault. But for some reason, if you hit your child, it is considered perfectly okay and even encouraged. What's even better is that most of the people who condone spanking are the same people who support an "embryo's right to life".
- pdethier
March 16, 2009 6:30PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.