DescentBB

By now some of you should have already heard the story of Walter McKelvie Jr. He faces 18 months in prison because he didn't apply enough sunblock on his 12 year old handicapped child while they were at the beach for a day.

The child suffered severe sunburns and his mother, who is seperated from the father and has partial custody, notified authorities afer rushing her son to the hospital and is pressing charges on the grounds of 'Child Neglect'. Walter McKelvie Jr said he applied sunblock on his child but prosecutors are saying he didn't apply enough sunblock.

Source: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5068136/

Some of you might read the article and say well "The burns were severe and he suffered bleeding blisters". We know the media all too well for that, they were blisters, plain and simple. Speaking as a person who has had ample experience with sunburns, I know all about blisters.

I'll even go one step further, I've been sunburnt so bad that I experienced low level symptoms of radiation sickness when I was younger. We were on a lake fishing, I was wearing sunscreen but I have really fair skin and the reflection of the UV light off the surface of the lake amplified everything. I had to soak in a tub of cold water and ice to stop the shaking and for the next week I was so sore and exhausted life was miserable. Should my Dad have been arrested? Should he have been prosecuted for 'Child Neglect'?

I love my dad, other then that sunburn our fishing trip was excellent and I enjoyed every minute of it. I didn't like him so much when he was getting after me with a belt or his hand whenever I did something stupid, but I know damn well I didn't repeat the same mistake twice.

Anyways, How does the judicial system even get away with pushing a case like this further? If the father has no history of child abuse how can this case even be prosecuted? There are a plethora of things that could have led to sunburn even with substantial sunblock on.

• [A] Sunblock wasn't waterproof.
  Sunblock was a low SPF number.
  [C] Sunblock was a poor brand & wore off.
  [D] Sunblock didn't withstand UV reflection off water surface.

You could go on, but the point is this case opens the doors to a whole bunch of other crap that is already beginning to take place in this country. That being the management by the government of how OUR children should be raised.

Take for example someone disciplining their child in the mall because the child was misbehaving or said something they probably shouldn't have and someone ends up calling child protective services and you, who had just been teaching your kid right from wrong are now all of a sudden a chronic life long 'Child Abuser' in the eyes of Big Brother. Even though the use of physical disciplines were few and far between.

How have we come to allowing the government to dictate who, where, when, and how in parenting? Why are they allowed to remove a child from a good home just because 'billy' got smacked in the butt for saying something dirty in public. I'm not talking about a beating, I'm talking about a spanking. I'm sure we all had those right? We didn't like them very much did we? Isn't that the point, to associate doing something bad with discipline and trying to avoid doing such things in the future? Isn't that the message being sent by the person doing the discipline?

I work night security at a church that's being built *cues snicker by Lothar & Drakona * and there is a housing development right next to it. Now, I'd like to say that this a good neighborhood I'm working in, but it isn't. It's sort of the white trailer trash center of Arizona.

Anyways, I'm out walking the fence at 10:30pm and these people have their kids out running around the neighborhood screaming bloody murder and one of them, couldn't have been more then 6 years old starts shouting "wassup" to me over and over again. I beamed him with the spotlight and said "Isn't it passed your bedtime?" and he just looked at me. So I ignored him and kept on walking my route when he started repeating "wassup" again but this time I just ignored him until he finally said "Hey, I'm talking to you!". Again, I continued to ignore him and started heading back to my truck when he shouted out "Yeah, thats right, walk away". Now....at that point I half wanted to laugh and half wanted to smack him upside the head because obviously his parents never have.

I turned around and stared at him and he went running into the garage of their house screaming "Mom!". To me, at six years old, saying the types of things he said to me were unfathomable. I NEVER would have said anything like that to someone, especially not someone who could easily be my own parent age wise when I was six years old. If I had mouthed off to someone like that even my mom would have thumped me in the back of the head.

It amazes me that in 60 years we've gone from allowing paddled spankings in schools to not even allowing teachers or parents to grab a kid by the arm without some sort of repercussion from the state or government. I'm not a parent, I'm not even involved at this time, but I do know that I very much want a family and it scares me to death to even imagine that I could be thrown in prison or have my children taken away from me because of stupid stuff like 'not applying enough sunscreen' or 'Susie didn't have enough protective gear on when she fell off her bike'. What do they want? Every child placed in a protective bubble so they never get dirty, never get hurt, what? heh, sorry, but I live in the real world and this stuff is absolutely ridiculous.

I mean, seriously, aren't these experiences what develop a childs understanding of what it takes to protect themselves? and what it is they should and shouldn't be doing? I don't believe in this BS method of parenting which thinks that talking things out with your kids or sending them to their rooms or to time out is good discipline. Hell, if my parents sent me to my room that was a reward. I had everything I needed to occupy my time in my room. Sitting in a corner doesn't accomplish anything, thats not real punishment.

My point is good or decent parents shouldn't have to worry about Big Brother taking away their children because they may have given them a spanking and some neighbor saw it and didn't approve. That isn't right. Next thing you know they'll make a new Gov. agency that sends an agent to live with you and tells you how to raise your children . They need to focus their time on taking these poor children that are being beaten constantly or living in filthy homes or crack houses and meth labs away from their horrible parents and giving them a chance to live a half way decent life.

Instead of going after and prosecuting Dad because he didn't put enough sunblock on his kid Personally, I think this is just an attack by the mother to get back at the father since they are seperated. She isn't even thinking about how her son is caught in the middle of all this now and yet the judicial system doesn't care about that. To me growing up in this type of environment by far would be more painful then any sunburn.

Well, I grew up in the mountains, completely isolated. My parents also thwocked me whenever I deserved it. I'm glad they did. I know many people who's parents didn't do anything when they should have. These people are very messed up. Physical punishment is, to me, a necessary requirement of growing up.

I totally agree with you. A lot of people have really lost touch with reality, it seems.

Tyranny wrote:... To me, at six years old, saying the types of things he said to me were unfathomable. I NEVER would have said anything like that to someone, especially not someone who could easily be my own parent age wise when I was six years old.

It's the exact same way with me: I'm 21, and within the last week I have had kids yelling at me the same way--something I would never have even thought of doing when I was young. Some thoughts I've had are, "what if these kids do it to the wrong persons?", and, "these kids really ought to show more respect for grown-ups."

Hey.. I'm a grown-up.. I made it! (despite my parents' threats: "I brought you into this world, I can take you out and bring another in just like you!")

It can be kind of frustrating: you'd like to do something to help the situation, but you're not their parent, and it would do more harm than good in most cases. I suppose there might be a few good ways to deal with it, though. If their parents are worth the space they take up on this earth, confronting them (the parents) about it might help. It might be a potential embarasement, but confronting the kid in a kind but serious manner might help.. even if you only get as far as approaching them, they asked for it. You could get creative.. .. maybe that wouldn't be helpful, though. *drools and looks wild-eyed at the next loud brat*

As for government butting in on child raising, that is scary. It's not just the "government", though, it's that lady in the store/mall that just can't believe you would lay a hand on a child like that *cue shocked and appalled look*. You just get a look of understanding from the folks that have actually *raised* children.

Discipline can be ugly sometimes: my little 4-5 year old brother was messing with an electrical wall socket once--he had been told before that it was dangerous, and that he wasn't to be near it; my dad took the vacuum cleaner cord that had been plugged in there, and whipped him so bad that I had a hard time dealing with it for a couple of days after that (particularly rough because he's my dad). My little brother suffered no lasting injury, however, and it's a good bet that he will never be taken away from us by electrical shock.
It's for their own best good in the end.. a good that I think many people have even lost sight of. Good is not being gentle and nice to your child all the time, good is ensuring that they will grow up prepared for life, and even grown up period!

i think discipline depends on the kid, and the parent having enough brains to decipher what works and what doesn't, what's necessary and what isn't. some kids you have to knock sense into, and some will be greatly effected by just the fact that you are upset with them and they won't do whatever they did again.

one of my brothers is like that, if you look at him funny because he does something wrong, he cries and runs off into his room. he doesn't do it anymore, and he's 5 years old. that's all it takes to get through to him, just let him know what he did wasn't right and that it hurts people, and he won't do it again.

there's a neighbor kid around here who is yugoslavian. he speaks english now, but he didn't when he got here. makes no difference. he didnt understand then and did dumb ★■◆●, and he understands now and still does dumb ★■◆●. i think he's 11 or 12. he's the type of kid that needs sense knocked into him, he won't get it on his own. if nobody does it, he'll be a wife beater when he grows up. he already smacks his little sister around, who's pretty small but pretty smart, so i really don't know her age. could be anywhere between 5 and 10. he's also swung at my 10 year old sister when she was here, and he doesn't understand what he's doing will get him severely beaten when he's old enough for someone's father or brother to give one to him. hell, the second i see facial hair on the boy i'm whippin his ass. he just doesn't get it, and no amount of time outs or lectures will have any effect. his parents need to beat him a little when he does things like that, it's the only way the kid will learn.

something like that i wouldn't mind having childrens services gettig involved with. taking him away, no. helping his family out yes, they don't speak english and understand a very small amount. when the principal calls they have no idea what they're being told their son did. they are mostly unaware of the things he does at school, and when they find out through body language and a tad of yugoslavian we've picked up around here what he did to someones house/yard/kid, they send him to his room where he just taunts everyone from his window.

its dumb ★■◆● over sunscreen that i think needs to be eliminated. it was almost definately caused 100% by the mother being vindictive. i can't honestly think of anything else. maybe a friend of the mother taking her side, but i highly doubt a neighbor would be daring enough to get involved over a sunburn. that's a tad too risky these days, but maybe i give people too much credit.

i also think, on a somewhat unrelated note, fathers need more rights in cases like this. women get special treatment. their word is taken as truth over the man's way too often without proper investigation, and often times it just mothers word against fathers word. no single side should be given preference before a case is begun, but as it stands now the fathers are screwed from the get go in any case where the mother isn't a known serial killer. do you think if the roles were reversed, that the mother would be charged with anything if the father had called about a sunburn? fat chance.

Sargeant Thorne wrote:Good is not being gentle and nice to your child all the time, good is ensuring that they will grow up prepared for life, and even grown up period!

Very well put. I agree completely.

kur, though I understand where you're coming from and I agree with you as well...I guess I get a little uneasy when the term "beaten" or "beating" is thrown around a little loosely. I recognize what you mean of course, that in the usage of "beating some sense" or "beating you to within an inch of your life" are more figurative rather then literal.

The example Thorne used with the chord scenario is what I mean. That was a beating, but it was a disciplinary action and unfortunately if a person outside of the home was shown the marks the chord made or saw them somehow his father could have been easily arrested for child abuse. Even though this was a incident isolated around teaching that playing with electrical cables is dangerous. The lesson was obviously learned. I can't say that I'd do the same thing, a firm spanking to the old behind might have sufficed but *shrug*. In a case like this, where I'm sure your dad loves you and your brother very much, as does mine, child protective services doesn't see it that way.

They like taking focus on these events rather then dealing with people who sensely whip their kids with stuff for no good reason. Notice how a lot of times when you see a report on the local news about child neglect or child abuse the neighbors all had no clue what was going on and had allowed it to go on for years and somehow those interviewed always use the cliche "They seemed like such nice people" line

If you need to hit your child then you've failed as a parent.

If you've resorted to smacking it means that:-

a) You've panicked because you've seen the child do somthing dangerous, it's scared you, and you reacted harshly to supposedly teach the child a lesson.

b) The child has defied you, you take it for a lack of respect, it's annoyed you so you react harshly to supposedly teach a the child a lesson

I'm not going to add any more, cause i think those are the main ones. In both cases the parent is the one that needs lessons not the child.

In a) you've failed as a parent because you've done a crappy job at explaining the consequences of dangerous situations. It's so easy to avoid this situation, yet i see my peers messing up quite a lot. I also find Thawns example reminding me how my dad used to discipline me and my sister, i've had no contact with him for twenty years now.

In b) the parent fails on two counts. First, is it a viable lesson to teach a kid that only through violence will one gain respect? I'm no hippy, all is peace, let them roam kind of dad, but to me there is somthing rather paradoxical in hitting for respect. I just don't get it. Second, kids defy their parents as soon as they get to around six months. They push boundries constantly, how else can they learn the rules of life without pushing them, and who else better to push these boundries than the people they love and trust the most.

Don't get me wrong kids are pain in the bleeding arse somtimes, a few times a week i have to internally count to ten before i respond to a situation. I also totally agree with "good is not being gentle and nice to your child all the time" , kids need to know your moods, they need to know when your pissed off with them. What they don't need is the threat of violence hanging over them just because they're growing up.

thats fine and dandy for most kids FC, but some you can't reason with like that. sometimes you have to blame the kid. it may be the parents fault most of the time, but not always. i have 4 siblings, and 1 of them truly needs smacked to learn anything. they were all raised the same way, and they all need to be disciplined differently. so did my parents fail because one of their kids doesn't react to time out but the other 3 do?

Yes, for sure all kids have to be disciplined according to their personality, there aint no hard and fast manual that covers every child. If it's known that your brother/sister needs to be smacked to learn a lesson, then the lesson isn't being learnt.

I believe every child has a lock and it's the parents job to find the right key. It's bloody hard to do, don't get me wrong, and i'm definatly not preaching. One thing i know though is that smacking dosn't work.

EDIT: i say "dont get me wrong" a lot don't i?

I think Flabby is right with one exception.
I never spank or otherwise hit my girls but... with both of them, when they were just toddlers at that stage where they were just able to walk around and constantly trying to touch/pick up things they shouldn't I would give the back of there hand a slap with a few of my fingers. Just enough to make it sting barely. Combined with a sharp "NO" they quickly learned to respect the "NO" and the slap wasn't needed anymore.
Maybe this was just me being lazy about it but it worked so well I think I can stand behind it.

Once their vocabulary developed a little I was able to control them without the need for anything physical.

Over all I think not only should you not use violence to control them, you should control your anger so they don't think of punishment is coming from anger but rather from authority.
Otherwise they will try to 'punish' people when they are angry at them.

My wife wasn't so keen on my no spanking methods but I think she's seen the light now.

That's my theory anyway, I only have two kids and the oldest is 10 so there is much yet to learn!

Will, i did exactly the same thing (my third is coming to that stage now), but i continued a few months. Thats when it dawned on me that what i was doing was a waste of time. So i changed my tactics.

Smacking a child does not mean you failed as a parent. That's a blanket statement as accurate as saying all car crashes are caused by cellphones. Beating a child for something as innocent as running over the vacuum cleaner cord with the vaccum cleaner and getting it stuck is a failure as a parent.

Flabby assumes that most kids are possessing a brain. Kids are like dogs, I find. Some dogs never need a smack, most do. They react to violence and pleasure. The dumber the kid, the more like an animal he is. Some kids never need a smack, most do. Sometimes it's the only way to get something to sink in. Sometimes it still doesn't work. But that's not the fault of the parent, that's the failure of the child. You give them all the happy you can (fun-n-games, toys, laughter, and all that), and when they do something wrong, you say No. Then you say why. They do it again, they get a No, and go in the corner. They do it again, they get a No, and a slap on the wrist. They do it again, they get a No, and smack on the ass. 'No' is usually not enough. (Variable punishment for age, of course, you don't put a belt to a toddler for going near the electrical outlets, you buy electrical outlet covers, and be the proper parent and watch the kid)

The most annoying, assinine, bratty, disrespectful, violent children I have ever had the displeasure of meeting all had mom's-n-dad's that sat in their chairs, while the kid is poking the dogs eyes and kicking the cat and throwing electronics in the tiolet, and all they say is "Settle down, Dameon", "Stop that Dameon" 5000 times, and the kid just keeps right on going, screaming his head off and throwing things at people and hitting people and on and on, and the brain-dead parents just say the same tired sentences over and over, and the kid grows up to be exactly like he was as a child because it was able to get away with it growing up, and that's what was learned. That is a failure as a parent.

If you really want to punish your child for some trivial wrongdoing, send them to *your* room. Booooring! No toys! Old people's stuff! eww! My dad would do that to me, 'cause I had Nintendo, GI Joe, Lego's..etc. in my room..what punishment was that?

(try to organize that into coherency..I'm lucky I got it all out )

Hey Flabby, do you have all girls? My ramblings are more focused on boys, not girls. I notice girls are usually so much better behaved than boys are, and rarely if ever need a spanking..just some tape over their mouths sometimes

i've seen kids who will sit there and stare while they are called by their mother. they'll sit there through nice requests, stern requests, threats of the father coming home, and threats of a beating. they will not budge one inch until she physically moves them. kids can be like that, what else are you supposed to do to them to get them to function?

i know a girl with a 5 year old who threw a knife at a friend of mine. he came running out of the kitchen into the living room with a chef's knife, big old ★■◆● eating grin on his face, and chucked it end over end right at him. before he even saw whether or not he got the kill (heh!) he turned around and ran away, giggling the whole way. i had to leave, i wanted to give him and his mom a severe beating. if it were my kid i would have. what are you supposed to do when that happens?

i agree that hitting a child should be a last resort, but i don't think it should be avoided at all costs. now i'm not saying beat a kid senseless becuase he came home a half an hour late, but if he does it every day no matter what you say maybe you should try a swift kick to the ass.

and yes, i'm mainly talking about boys too. you have to treat them differently, because they are different.

Testi, i wrote a shite long responce to your post and at the end thought what the hell. You've had bad experience with examples of spoilt kids. It's not the kids fault though, however annoying they may be.

I've got an 11 yr old daughter who is blessed (or cursed) with being very beutiful. And she's started with the hormones. A seven year old son who dosn't take sh1t from no-one and beat up on a ten year old yesterday. Also a nine month old daughter who is at the stage Will described before. So i have my problems as you can see.

I wish CUDA would see this thread i'd love to hear his take on the subject.

Testi brought up a really good point. It seems I was making the mistake of writing from the standpoint of raising a boy as well. This is quite embarrassing because I hadn't really thought that deeply about raising a girl.

Looking back at my sister for example, she didn't need to be spanked or yelled at to not do something nearly as often as I did, though my point of view might be a little bit off since I'm four years older then she is. She did receive the occasional spankings but the physical punishment seemed more reserved for me and mostly from my Dad. My Mom used to flick us behind the ears when we did something wrong but usually I got the big strong calloused hands dishing out the spanking.

My sister has been more annoyingly disfunctional since about 13-14. Which I assume is normal since girls tend to become menaces (I mean this in the nicest way Drakona ) in their preteen/teenage pubescent years and beyond. She's 19 now and though she has grown up quite a bit she still tends to act like a 16 year old at times. Course, we all have our relapses into childhood

Flabby, I want to make something perfectly clear. I don't think I have the stomach to raise my kids using the same type of treatment my dad used with me. I haven't nearly lived the harsh type of life he has but I do greatly agree with Testi's dog analogy in the fact that we as boys tend to understand physical punishments a great deal better then any kind of verbal command. That physical punishment can be as simple as a couple slaps on the bottom a stinging slap to the hand as Will suggested, an annoying flick of the ears as my mother did. It doesn't have to be harsh at all. It does not have to follow the blueprint our fathers used whatsoever. If those examples fail though, what then? If my boy doesn't respond to the gentle yet stern approach, what then?

Flabby you're speaking directly on the form of discipline rather then the ability of the government to remove the child for said disciplines, which technically was the original intent of this thread.

So, lets try to get this thing back on course. We are our own people and my whole point is that Big Brother should not be able to dictate how we raise our children. As individuals we hold the responsibility and the right to raise our children the best way we know how. It isn't up to the government to dictate that nor is it the business of our neighbors to initiate contact with the government about it.

My arguement here is that physical discipline (A discipline with a point) and child abuse (outright neglect and abuse of a child) are two completely different things. Also, using the reference story as an example, accidents DO happen. Should the government now be allowed to arrest you and potentially remove your children from you because you ALLOWED them to get hurt?

It does almost seem like they would rather have all children living in a bubble, as I mentioned in my first post, so they never get dirty or hurt ever again. We were never raised that way, why should we subject our children to such a boring existence? Frankly every cut, scrape, bruise, break, whatever was a life experience that taught me a lesson. I'd gladly live through such things again if ownly for the knowledge that they bring with them. Our kids shouldn't be deprived of such things because that's only asking for trouble later on in life. We also shouldn't be perceived as bad parents when such accidents occur, but it's starting to get that way.

While I may not agree with others' discipline methods, I do think it's absurd that the government sometimes steps in and threatens to take children away when it's not warranted.

You *can* go to far, and the government *should* step in if you come home drunk and beat the hell out of your kid every day. But taking your kid away because you spanked them? That's not cool -- even if you shouldn't have spanked the kid, it's not a big enough mistake to warrant taking the kid away.

With respect to the original story, I don't have enough information to judge (just like I don't have enough info to judge if they took a kid away because his daddy "hit him") -- without actually seeing the extent of the sunburn and hearing the whole testimony, I'm not qualified to judge. It sounds absurd from what we have, but... maybe the dad actually did take the kid out for a whole day in the scorching sun without sunscreen, and the kid puffed up all red and blistered like I do, and the dad has made a pattern of it so it'd qualify as neglect. Maybe the judge was right. Or, maybe the dad used cheap sunscreen and the kid got a couple little blisters where it washed off, and the mom is a vindictive b**** who pressed this too far. We simply don't know.

Regardless of if he put sunblock on the kid or not he still shouldn't be facing 18 months in prison for such a thing. Even against better judgement parents sometime heed the kids wish to not wear it because they don't like it (Which happend to me a lot) and what happend? He got sunburned badly.

To me, thats a life lesson. However, they only mentioned hes 'handicapped'. I'm wondering if he is mentally challenged or something rather then physically handicapped. Either way a bad sunburn is a bad sunburn. The father shouldn't be facing prison time for such stupid stuff. Get the kid some ointment and he'll be cleared up in about a week. It shouldn't warrant a lawsuit but of course $$$ is involved and these days prosecutors will take ANY case as long as they get the dough.

but we don't know if maybe this is the 10th time this happened, and the dad has been warned before that he needs to put sunblock on the kid, and he just hasn't listened. If that's the case, then yes, he *should* be facing 18 months prison time.

My point is, we don't know the full details. It sure sounds overboard from the news story, but then, I've never known the news to report accurately on anything I've been involved in. It's possible this was just the last straw in a string of neglectful incidents. It's also possible this was a one-time thing.

We can't judge from the one incident (especially without full details on the one incident) whether or not the government should step in. Just like, if we hear a kid got smacked by his daddy, we can't judge from that one incident whether or not the government should step in. We need to know if it was "he was trying to kill his little sister, so his daddy smacked him to get him off of her" or "his daddy came home drunk like always and smacked him like always" -- we need to know if it's an isolated mistake, or part of a pattern of neglect. The news story doesn't give us any information about that.

Yea, the cops might be reacting based on info provided by the mother and her attorney who want this to be big trouble to enable them to force the court to stop daddy's visitaton rights.

or...

This might be a mentally retarded child who was left out in the sun to bake, relatively defenseless due to his diminished mental capacity, while dad was hitting the nearby bar.

Some of the story is missing I'm thinking.

Kurupt wrote:but if he does it every day no matter what you say maybe you should try a swift kick to the ***.

Actually, I believe it is better for a disciplinary beating to be more formal. It's what's in the parent's heart that matters, but I would tend to view smacks/slaps or kicks as abusive, if only because of the spur-of-the-moment nature of it.

When I was a child and told my father no or simply disobeyed, I woke up looking at the ceiling fan. My father didn't tell me the same thing twice and I'm glad. I have more respect for my father than I do for my mother who was on the other end of the spectrum. If I have a problem I cannot solve, I go to my father.
I do believe that some children don't need to be harshly dealt with, but the vast majority do.
FC, if you believe that the need to lovingly strike a child for correction means you've failed as a parent, you *are* a failing parent and you just don't know it yet.
There's a difference between striking a child for spilling milk and striking a child for lying.

That judge should do 18 months for taking the father out of that childs life for the said period of time.

B-

Lothar, there are plenty of topics debated in E&C about this and that of which only have the same amount of information given from each source you can find. Don't crap on my thread and cop-out of the discussion just because the article and the situation doesn't have a vast enough body of information for you.

This topic goes far beyond the problems of Walter McKelvie Jr.

Tyr, half of my original post was on topics OTHER THAN sunburn-boy. I didn't "cop out of the discussion" -- I gave my input about the general ideas, and then at the end I mentioned that in the specific case of sunburn-boy, there might be more info. Then when you responded, you ignored the first half of my post (that went "far beyond" the problems of sunburn-boy) and argued only about what I said about sunburn-boy, and somehow concluded that I'm crapping on your thread for suggesting that in one specific case we're all unsure of what happened.

Here, here's what I said that has nothing to do with sunburn-boy.

Lothar wrote:While I may not agree with others' discipline methods, I do think it's absurd that the government sometimes steps in and threatens to take children away when it's not warranted.

You *can* go to far, and the government *should* step in if you come home drunk and beat the hell out of your kid every day. But taking your kid away because you spanked them? That's not cool -- even if you shouldn't have spanked the kid, it's not a big enough mistake to warrant taking the kid away.

Fusion pimp wrote:FC, if you believe that the need to lovingly strike a child for correction means you've failed as a parent, you *are* a failing parent and you just don't know it yet.B-

Could you explain that a bit more.

What i'm seeing here is people who don't have kids take one perspective, and the couple that do take another. Interesting.

Land of the heavily legislated, home of the idiots.

*sigh*

It's self explanatory, FC.
Furthermore, if you're suggesting that I'm taking that stance because you assume I don't have children, you're incorrect.
I have a 19 year old boy(Steve)and 13 year old girl(Celine)

No! I wasn't assuming anything. And yes i do believe one has failed in ones responsibilities as a guardian/parent if one has to resort to violence. And never the twain shall meet i suppose.

Flabby Chick wrote:If you need to hit your child then you've failed as a parent.

Come to America and visit any store and watch the kids that run loose all over the place and then say that. Sorry, but sweeping generalizations like that just don't fly. That would work better if you had said "If you don't discipline your children, then you've failed as a parent." or "If you need to hit your child all the time, then you've failed as a parent." as they don't include the decent parents that only spank their children as needed. There are some kids that just will not listen and require a quick spanking to get their attention. Talk to any parent and they'll tell you the same thing.

Lothar, the only reason I jumped on that comment was because time and time again I've seen articles with the same basic information regardless of the source about whatever being posted on the E&C. Then most of us, including yourself, rant on and on about it despite the fact that everybody is most assuredly jumping to conclusions since there isn't enough information or it is just outright misleading.

I didn't intend to totally dismiss your statement regarding the true topic at hand. I did read it but for some reason the comment about lack of information stood out since this is hardly the first time it has happend nor will it be the last. It just made me a little angry I guess. Anyways, since I've had eight hours to stew about it, sorry for the cop-out remark.

FC, if you can't see the difference between violence and correction we're wasting time.

B-

Flabby Chick wrote:
I wish CUDA would see this thread i'd love to hear his take on the subject.

your wish is my command

having 4 boys and 4 girls
my sons are 21,18,14,12
my girls are 19,17,15,10

for me personally I find it harder to raise my daughters now especially that they have reached the teenage years my 10 year old is in the pre-puberty stages and is crying all the damn time ( i'm losing what little hair I have ) as was stated each kid MUST be treated different, and each responds to different stimuli some spanking, others timeouts, others just need attention, many psycholgist say that a childs behavoral paters are set by the age of 6, I have found this to be true, you must get them under control by that age or your life will be VERY difficult. also never try and reason with anyone under 20 as you would another adult ( I know this will offend some of us here on the board ) but for the most part they are incapable of rational thought, thier lives are self centered at that age trying to find there way in life, they think that they have the experience that is needed and want to know why they arent givin a chance to run thier own affairs. its because you make immature decisions plain and simple. you do it, I do it, everyone on this board was the same way. as for the disciple aspect, when my children were young I did spank, mind you I said spank not beat, there is a HUGE difference, never spank your kid in anger. children need structure they need to know limits and as a parent its your job to be consistent and loving. I tell my wife constantly when she has a problem with my daughters that her job is not to be thier friend its to be thier parent. my job is to raise and teach my children to be productive adults productive people, and productive parents when they reach that age. now that being said it doesnt mean that I dont have fun with my kids, but alot of parent let thier kids think they are in charge. WRONG.
as I stated I spanked my kids when they were little and havent spanked them in a long time, my 12 year old son I dont think I ever spanked him, he didnt need it. on the other hand a few months back I took my 18 year old son to the floor by his throat because he threatened his mother. he didnt like something she said and thought he was the alpha male of the house and was gonna give him the what for, when I confronted him he started giving me lip. so I had to show him the old Lion still had his teeth. regaurdless of any profession you take on in life Parenting will be the most difficult. its is a thankless job with more heartache and sadness than anyhting you will ever do. but its also the most joyfull job I can ever imagine with the most love and fun of anything I have ever done in my life. back on topic the mother that had charges filed againt her husband was probably using any means at her disposal to get back for a failed marrage. $hit happens it dad put sunscreen on his son and it wasnt enough then its was a mistake not neglegence ANYONE who has ever gotten sunburnt knows that its sneeks up on you real fast. in most cases by the time you notice the pink skin its too late. just my .02$

CUDA wrote:ANYONE who has ever gotten sunburnt knows that its sneeks up on you real fast. in most cases by the time you notice the pink skin its too late. just my .02$

I can attest to that. By the time I notice my skin having a pink tint, I'm already cooked. (Most of you that have seen my mug know that my skin is pretty fair...mostly because I can't tan no matter how often I go outside, thus I get burned pretty often no matter how much sunscreen I put on...or how strong for that matter.)

I have the same problem MD. I'll notice a burn within roughly 10 minutes of being outside in the sun. The only time I tan is when my left arm is outside the driver side window of my truck driving somewhere during the day on a constant basis and then I end up having one ghost white right arm and a bronze looking left, some tan huh? lol.

It doesn't help living in Arizona, thats for sure.

I know this topic has been idle for a bit, but i really want to make a few comments.

I am social worker and conduct intake assessments for child and adult protective services for the State of Texas. I say this not because it means my expertise makes me an authority, or if so, because that authority makes my case stronger, but only so you know the basis of my commentary.

that said...removals are uncommon. children are not removed for minor reasons. they are removed for life-threatening reasons. there are a few basic reasons for removals. the reasons behind removals generally entail that there is future risk, not just an isolated incident. 1. a child has suffered serious harm as a result of abuse/neglect/exploitation, 2. there is pending investigation that serious harm may have been caused by abuse/neglect/exploitation, or 3. the results of an investigation alleging abuse/neglect/exploitation are validated or found "reason to believe" (RTB). again, an isolated incident or factor is insufficient. every case is looked at on a case by case basis. there are very few RTB allegations that, by themselves, would justify removal.

A few factors that are key to any assessment would be...

1. impact to child, or the extent of the abuse
2. pattern of maltreatment
3. child vulnerability
4. caregiver capability
5. home environment
6. family support
7. caregiver's response to agency intervention

There is much more going on in this case than was reported in the article. This is not surprising. The information documented in a CPS investigation is confidential. I don't know the New Jersey statue. But chances are the child was profoundly MR, and the extent of the impact extensive for the penalty to this father to have been incarceration. CPS doesn't arrest people and they don't prosecute them criminally either. Only law enforcement can do those things.

Young children are highly vulnerable. So are special needs children. These are important factors when assessing impact, risk, and caregiver capability. This dad phucked up. Not neccesarily as indicated in the article but beyond that i am certain. I could tell you stories that would put you off food a good while - you would lose your fricken appetite believe me. Only complete phuck ups have their kids removed.

The philosophy of CPS is to offer services to keep family's together, not split them up. In cases where removal is necessary, the abuse is always bad - i mean horror show bad. Notice that in this case, the father was the possesory conservator, not the primary managing conservator/MC, i.e. mother was the primary guardian and father only had visitation rights. the significance is that even if the father is being penalized, the rights of the MC are not being terminated. the child is being left in the care of his mother.

In Texas, CPS is profoundly respectful of privacy and the right to the parents self-determination. I am constantly amazed by how respectful the agency is of each person's right to raise their children the way they see fit - whether this means using corporal punishment or not. but there are limits. people often call me and report what they suspect is abuse/neglect, when it does not actually meet our guidelines, i.e. what they report does not justify CPS intervention under the law. People get pissed when I tell them I won't take a report.

People are more often upset by the agency's actions because they feel it is not doing enough than because they feel it is doing too much. On a daily basis I have to explain to people that we can't investigate what they are reporting. Then I explain to them the following...

Bad parenting is not illegal. CPS will not investigate bad parenting. Yet, Abuse/neglect is bad parenting. Only when that line is crossed will CPS step in to act "in the best interest" of the child; for the child's protection. CPS has no jurisdiction over custody matters. CPS will not arbitrate disputes over custody and will not intervene in custody unless abuse/ neglect is involved.

This means examining factors such as the seven listed above to assess for impact and ongoing risk. If it is determined that the risk is sufficient that the child could suffer irreversible harm, i.e. death, disfigurement, etc, then removal may be neccesary. Most removals are temporary and involve placement with family members. Supervised vistation is usually in place. In Texas, there are strict time constraints for actions that occur after a removal. Within a proscribed timeframe there will be either family reunification (where the child is placed back in the home from where they were removed), or a permanent placement elsewhere will be found, again typically with family.

Workers don't want to remove children. It's more work for them and more stress for the already anemic system. Worse, children sometimes get abused in foster homes. There is nothing a CPS worker would rather find during an investigation than that the allegations are "ruled out" - or falsified.

The notion that CPS is quick to remove or even quick to investigate is a myth. It takes a lot even to pass the intake stage. Allegations that meet guidlines will typically indicate one of two things: 1. substantial harm has occurred, or 2. there is a genuine threat of immediate, substantial harm. On many occasions I have explained to reporters the difference between bad parenting and abuse/neglect. for those that are really having a hard time accepting my assesment, i firmly tell them that we would cease to be a democracy and become fascits if we even investigated bad parenting, let alone intervene for it. CPS is no Big Brother. In my opinion, CPS workers are, in general, caring, educated, hard working, motivated individuals who are over worked and underpaid.

I could say much more, but I hope this is sufficient to point out the other side of this. CPS saves lives every day. CPS performs a vital job in a way that respects freedom and democracy, while protecting children who are unprotected. If we were not a democracy, then maybe CPS would have been set up to control how people parent. But this is not the case in reality. In reality CPS is designed exactly as a democratic intitution should be - not to better society, but to relieve unneccesary, substantial suffering of those who cannot help themselves.

..joining late.

I think that yes, smacking is necessary for disciplining (sp?) a child. Without it they'd just be, well, uncontrollable idiots.

But I'd like to link onto Flabby's second point which I agree with. I think it is true what he says a lot of the time, that a parent feels they have lost the respect from their children. I've seen plenty of examples. (I'm 15, by the way). now my Dad uses excuses like...

â?¢ "I've tried talking to you"
â?¢ "You've been told before"
â?¢ "One day someone is just gonna turn round and break your face, thats why I have to do it"
â?¢ "It's the only way"
â?¢ "You have no respect"

Only the thing is, the more he hits me, the more he loses my respect. Hell, it almost happened yesterday. I had a big argument with my parents while my girlfriend was in the house and we decided to leave. After we came back, I was threatened with being kicked out of the house, and he said that if I didn't leave in the first place he would have "bounced me off the walls".

To be honest, it was only the fact that my girlfriend was in the same room as me that he didn't lay a finger on me. But, mark my word, if he did I was prepared to report him to the police I was that pissed off. I'm not stupid. Maybe I'm too old to be beaten about? Maybe I'm "just the right age". Either way, I'm not letting it happen.

And yes, I agree that good is ensuring they grow up prepared for life. Just not afraid of it.

Pally,
CPS doesn't work that way in California. They do not leave the parent to raise the child as the parent see's fit, they force the parents to raise the child as CPS see's fit. They are absolute Nazis in California.
The law states that if there is a visible mark on the child, no matter how faint, CPS will remove that child and the parent will be charged. I can't speak for Texas, but California CPS borderlines criminal.
And no, Pally.. I'm not exaggerating.

Hell, it almost happened yesterday. I had a big argument with my parents while my girlfriend was in the house and we decided to leave.

Arguing with your parents and then you complain that he's going to "bounce you off the walls".. heh
Then you're going to do it with your girlfriend there?
*you* decided to leave? you're 15.. you can leave when your parents tell you can leave.


You highlighted "..have no respect", based on your post, I think your father's right.

B-

If I didn't respect him, I'd set his pants on fire

That wouldnt be a pretty sight...

* Robo's neighbors spot Robo's dad screaming and chasing Robo with smoke billowing everywhere ... and whats this? He has a baseball bat!

kurupt wrote:i think discipline depends on the kid, and the parent having enough brains to decipher what works and what doesn't, what's necessary and what isn't. some kids you have to knock sense into, and some will be greatly effected by just the fact that you are upset with them and they won't do whatever they did again.

I agreee. Sometimes physical punishment is necissary, sometimes it isn't.

Flabby Chick wrote:b) The child has defied you, you take it for a lack of respect, it's annoyed you so you react harshly to supposedly teach a the child a lesson .....What they don't need is the threat of violence hanging over them just because they're growing up.

I disagree. First, physical punishment is not equal to violence. Violence is NOT in love, while physical punishment MUST be in love. I think kids need to learn to fear the consequances of disobedience and doing wrong- that is exactly what motivates them not to do these things. I think defiance IS a lack of respect- defiance is basically stating that I know better than YOU- if you let kids openly defy you, you are allowing them to take you down from your position of leadership and set themselves up there instead. Whatever form it may take, defiance needs to punished- not because children shold not have a mind of their own, but because in the end its either going to be your way or their way- and if you don't start by dealing with them defying you, eventually they will simply have it their way- behind you back if need be. I think the younger the kid, the more effective smacking can be- once kids have grown old enough that you gotta really hit 'em hard to make it hurt, you better switch to different tactics. (and use physical punishment as a last resort) Sometimes with little kids the best thing you can do is pat em on the bottom once, in my opinion. Most importantly: make sure its on a per-child basis- different kids need different things.

many psycholgist say that a childs behavoral paters are set by the age of 6, I have found this to be true, you must get them under control by that age or your life will be VERY difficult.

Very well put- and after the age of 6, I doubt many kids will need to get spanked.

"Violence is NOT in love, while physical punishment MUST be in love."

Good grief what a load of rubbish. Whatever your intention, the act of smacking anyone is violence.

There are better, more educational, more pursuasive ways of teaching a child right and wrong in my opinion, without the need to raise a hand. (I'm talking about formative years rather than CUDA's recent experience)

Look, children are all different. FC, you can't blame all of a kid's actions on the parents. You simply can't. Some kids are out of control by nature. The failure comes in when the parent doesn't do anything about it.

That being said, I was a stubborn out of control kid when I was little. My mother is very old-fashioned, from the "old country," and my father is a good old boy from South Dakota. Quite a pair, but in any case, both very competent parents. I was the kind of kid who didn't listen to no, who didn't listen to reason or pay attention to anybody. Did my parents take me in and have me put on some psychobabble drug for ADD? Hell no...they did what was right and they disciplined me. They had to hit me...A LOT. I wouldn't listen any other way. There was always an explanation that came with the discipline, and I was more inclined to listen to it so I knew why I just got beat. But I learned. And while I still screwup now that I'm 17, I know when I've screwed up, and I take responsibility for my actions. Would I be so inclined to take responsibility for myself if my parents hadn't taken responsibility for me in the first place and disciplined me the way that I personally needed to be disciplined? I think not. Some kids don't need to be hit to learn a lesson. Some do because they're stubborn little nightmares like me.