MercuryNews.com | 01/18/2007 | No-spank bill on way — I’m wondering exactly how this could possibly be enforced without cameras in the house. While I am no advocate of spanking, I’m not going to deny that some kids seem to be wired with spanking in mind. In fact the spanking studies which indicate that spanking leads to long-term bad behavior might be backwards. You can’t prove to me that some psycho kid wouldn’t be a psycho if he wasn’t spanked. We’ve all seen kids here and there that appear to need some sort of harsh action. That said, there is nothing more disgusting than a mom in a store who is whacking her kid at every turn for no apparent reason except for the fact that kids are curious and that she’s an obvious jerk. Whatever the case, this is, in fact, nanny government.
SACRAMENTO – The state Legislature is about to weigh in on a question that stirs impassioned debate among moms and dads: Should parents spank their children?
Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View, wants to outlaw spanking children up to 3 years old. If she succeeds, California would become the first state in the nation to explicitly ban parents from smacking their kids.
Making a swat on the behind a misdemeanor might seem a bit much for some — and the chances of the idea becoming law appear slim, at best — but Lieber begs to differ.
“I think its pretty hard to argue you need to beat a child 3 years old or younger, Lieber said. “Is it OK to whip a 1-year-old or a 6-month-old or a newborn?
The bill, which is still being drafted, will be written broadly, she added, prohibiting “any striking of a child, any corporal punishment, smacking, hitting, punching, any of that. Lieber said it would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail or a fine up to $1,000, although a legal expert advising her on the proposal said first-time offenders would probably only have to attend parenting classes.
The idea is encountering skepticism even before its been formally introduced. Beyond the debate among child psychologists — many of whom believe limited spanking can be effective — the bill is sure to face questions over how practical it is to enforce and opposition from some legislators who generally oppose what they consider “nanny government.
Most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard! What’s next? Timeouts become a form of child neglect?
I’ll admit it: my parents spanked me when I misbehaved. I later went on to college, found myself a wonderful woman (and intimacy “issues” are non-existant), and became a reasonably successful individual. I kept on the straight-and-narrow, never got into drugs and never had troubles with the law. Why? Because my parents taught me that my actions carry consequences.
And let’s face it: a lot of kids these days could *use* a good spanking.
Yet another reason not to reproduce!
I think taking their Xbox or Wii away is much harsher punishment.
I’ll admit it: my parents spanked me when I misbehaved.
I’m old enough that my parents didn’t fall for the “Dr. Spock” style of parenting… and even have a story about my misbehavior that led to spanking.
Each time, my parent(s) would warn me ‘don’t do that or you’ll get spanked’. They admitted they could see me weighing the options, and finally deciding it was worth it. Yes, they DID spank me… had to, or they’d lose credibility (ahem… not like this ties in to anything political).
So… spanking taught me to estimate values (for me) and go ahead regardless (or knowing I would be punished) of the consequences.
J/P=?
I think Mistress Sally needs to be spanked or better yet bonked on the noggin.
Spanking them with their Xbox or Wii would be an even harsher punishment.
😉
I’m surprised that human society hadn’t already collapsed, forcing us all back into caves, before all these terrible wrongs could be identified and corrected by the great enlightenment of the 60s and 70s.
Well, spanking is already illegal in Denmark, regardless of the childs age. Seems to work just fine, not that many parents spanked the children to begin with.
More wackiness from the land of fruits and nuts. Oh wait, don’t most of the posters here come from CA, weird.
So I asked my kids. Would you rather have a spank that lasts for 3 seconds followed by 30 seconds of pain… or be grounded from something for a day. They always opt for the spank. Now if I could just get the gov’t let me pay my traffic tickets with a good caneing.
You can get wonderful results with dogs using shock collars.
The bigger question should be, Where does government draw the line in dictating what you can or cannot do?
Is spanking a child even a morality question to begin with? Is the right of the Parent to raise their child as they see fit (excluding what 100% of the population would agree as abuse) getting eroded? Should an oligarchy of people instill their value system onto you whereby you must submit or face the consequences?
On a side note, I’ve heard so many cases whereby liberal sympathizers make apologetic explanations over why a particular hardened criminal got that way…. what’s the usual excuse? He grew up in a broken family being raised by a single mom…. hmmm, historically speaking, mothers tend to be nurturers and fathers tend to be disciplinarians. What do you suppose most fathers use to discipline their child?
I have been witness to one incident to a person’s career going down the tubes and heard of another almost getting that way by child services. Although they serve a purpose, from my limited exposure to them, it seems that they shoot first and then ask questions later. In the case where the person’s career went down the tubes, it was found that no abuse was actually done but that person’s lawyer advised them not to sue (after not having their child for over 1 year) because child services was acting in the best interest of the child and no judge was rule against child services because of that.
What bothers me is spanking even a problem? Surely the liberals can find bigger fish to fry than making a huge issue out of something that is best left to the parent.
The liberals already feel that a parent should not be entitled to knowing in advance any medical procedure done on their child (i.e. abortion) even though they are legally responsible for their child’s behavior (violence, truancy). Nice to know that liberals are finding ways to put parents in check…. hmmm, I wonder what happens when a child cries wolf…. is the parent first arrested, found out that they are innocent, but then fined because their child made a false accusation and wasted government resources?
Boy would I love to see that happen and watch how the beauty of this plan would unravel if California is crazy enough to adopt this legislation.
I think what’s being missed here is that the proposed law prohibits spanking toddlers under three, not older children. Most child experets tend to agree that spanking is ineffective in very young children.
I agree, but where does it stop? Would it get amended later for more ages?
What about “fake” spankings that are more emotional than physical forms of discipline you see parents often times do? Is this the true goal of the amendment?
How traumatized would a child get from one of these fake spankings? How do you measure if the spanking causes more physical pain than emotional if all you have is a crying child that didn’t get their way?
I agree, this shouldn’t necessitate a law..but it might be nice to have some dialogue about it.
Thank goodness it’s still legal in Vegas.
Not that I’m in to that kind of thing, or anything.
I’m just surprised that someone is trying to say spanking which in my eyes is nothing more than a specific kind of slap is the same as punching.
Striking with an opened hand vs. a closed hand has two different purposes. Slaps simply hurt… usually unless you’re dealing with a woman with unusually sharp ginsu knife finger nails…. but a punch is intended to cause physical damage (i.e. broken nose, knocked out teeth, etc.) along with the pain.
Whether or not you agree / disagree with someone’s preference for discipline, I fail to see how slapping and punching are the same.
I still remember the news stories a few years ago about school teachers not using red ink to grade papers with because of how traumatic it could be to the kids. So of course spanking your kid is going to leave deep, life-long emotional scars. Pretty soon, your sons will be drinking soy milk and touching other boys on the ass. :-/
“I agree, this shouldn’t necessitate a law..but it might be nice to have some dialogue about it.”
#15 – No.
The country is turning into “Politically correct good two shoes busybodies” minding everyone else’s business. Next there will be a federal law against spanking. We have real problems that we spend too much time talking about already. Want to talk about child abuse, how about the debt we are leaving for these kids to pay off?
Good luck to us all – is there any hope for common sense.
Bill
I recollect a news story a handful of years ago where a child psychologist strongly recommended against Musical Chairs in the classroom for the very reason that in each round a child has to lose and losing can traumatize a child emotionally. What happens when they grow up into their early 20s and realize they don’t win all the time? I suppose it’s less traumatic for a person to grow up thinking they never lose? Only to find out that they can and it’s quite easy if you don’t prepare for life? 🙂
But back onto the whole spanking = punching bit, we’ve all seen where a parent firmly grabs their problem child by the hand and they go to the bathroom or some other private place to have the child disciplined. Now no one sees what happens to the child other than maybe some teary eyes and such when they get back, but what if the California Gestapo or its spies senses the child was spanked?
Does this mean they separate the child from the parent and start asking questions to the child such as “Did your father touch you in the rear?”, “Did it hurt?”, etc. Not only does that sound bad in all the wrong ways, but I shudder to think how possible a scenario like that could be just on the suspicion that a parent took their child to a bathroom and spanked them if they were seriously misbehaving.
Again, we’re talking children 3 years of age or under, but I doubt once something like this gets legitimized that it would stop at only 3.
I think this is a very good idea. Violence leads to violence. And even if spanking doesn’t seem to be violence to you or me, it sure the hell is to a toddler. Dunno about you, but I am almost three times as tall and more than 10 times as heavy as my two-year-old. Imagine someone 12 feet tall weighing over a ton spanking you: wouldn’t that seem at least semi-violent to you?
My three-year-old son is one of the best behaved children that I have ever met. He is considerate of others, he listens and behaves, and he has never been spanked. (Nor will he ever be.)
The key to raising considerate, respectful children isn’t threatening them with violence. It’s being involved, setting a good example, setting boundaries, and providing punishments that teach cause and effect (if you do this, then you have to sit in time-out instead of playing) instead of fear. Kids (even toddlers) are smarter than we give them credit for.
#12 Wrote:
“Boy would I love to see that happen and watch how the beauty of this plan would unravel if California is crazy enough to adopt this legislation.”
If you have to ask if California is crazy enough to pass something like this, then you obviously haven’t lived here! The California legislature is plenty crazy! Most people in other parts of the U.S. (let alone the rest of the world) would not believe the crap that passes through our legislature. We pass approximately 1000 new laws each year covering the wishes and desires of almost any special interest group that can afford to buy a law. We truly have the best laws that money can buy.
Steve S
First I would like to comment from a moral standpoint then a legal standpoint.
Morally we can only appeal to the Bible, which clearly states to parents, “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him” (Pro 22:15) and “The rod and reproof give wisdom; but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame” Pro 29:15, and “Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die” Pro 23:13. “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him quickly” Pro 13:24. “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying” Pro 19:18.
“He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (often)” Pro 13:24.
Morally God requires all parents to chasten their own children in love, because the only good (morally in the sight of God) parent is one who sees a little “evil” (a spanking) as necessary in order to prevent a big evil (disorderly and rebellious life) later. This speaks of the “rod” being applied on the kid’s rear end. No striking in the head or face or other things. God is clear about this.
Child abuse is also a sin and should not be tolerated. Firm physical punishment in love is very different from child abuse or sexual abuse and these two crimes should not be mixed or confused with simple parental discipline. No biblical punishment will draw blood, cause bruises, or other such abuses. The parent that exceeds himself should change or give up his children to somebody else to parent if he places his child in peril of physical death or injury.
Having said that firmly we should discipline, that has to be temperated with another spiritual principle, “Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.” Col. 3:21. The counter balance to discipline is to not “provoke” (stir up, excite, stimulate, to cause strong bad emotions), such as to cause “discouragement” (disheartened, dispirited or broken in spirit). Discipline yes, abuse no!
Love must be defined as doing THE BEST THING FOR THE CHILD in the long view of things, and there is no way to do that except with strong discipline that is balanced with love, and no excesses. “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth…for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?” Hebr 12:7-8. (See 2 Sam 7:14).
The bottom line is that this is a moral question, and being so, it has to be resolved from a moral frame (a biblical perspective). Love means discipline (and guidance and direction), and discipline means spanking or some kind of punishment for incorrect behaviour.
Legally it is difficult to make parents economically and legally responsible for their children’s conduct and yet take away any kind of deterents to behaviour. You kids destroys somebody else’s property, you as a parent have to pay for it, but the law refuses to let you punish your kid for it. Is this not insanity? Yes it is.
This is like holding the police responsible for crime in a city, but not allowing them to restraint or punish any criminals. It is illogical and doesn’t work. Imagine telling police and judges to “fix what is wrong” by only using nasty words at the criminals! DUMB and INEFFECTIVE!
#23
Oh yeah, the Bible is a stellar authority for child rearing. Let’s see there is the whole incident with God telling Abraham to knife his kid into pork chops. Then there is the killing of all Egyptian first borns in order to get the Jews a ticket out of dodge.Then there’s other gems like:
“And I will cause them to eat the flesh of tyheir sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat everyone the flesh of his friend”
Jeremiah 19:9
“Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers…”
Isaiah 14:21
“The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.”
Proverbs 29:15
“He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.”
Proverbs 13:24
Although I think that spanking is an effect tool for discipline, like all things it must be used in moderation. My parents spanked my sister and I when were children and hated doing it everytime but do not regret doing it.
#21 – “Violence leads to violence. ”
You may believe that to be so, but, as with far too many feel-good, ‘peace-love-doves’ ‘can’t we all just get along’ ultraliberal beliefs, it is not only unsupported by credible research, it’s also flatly contradicted by overwhelming empirical evidence to the contrary.
It sounds nice & neat, but it confounds actual violence, adult physical coercion and abuse with child discipline. They are different phenomena with different motivations differing radically in severity.
Saying ‘violence leads to violence’ implies, falsely, that discipline results in criminal behavior, a patent absurdity.
A parent seeking to modify a child’s inappropriate behavior by slapping or spanking that child is in no way equivalent to an adult beating, stabbing or shooting another. And the suggestion that being disciplined in childhood results in the disciplinee inflicting violence on others in adulthood is contrary to known fact.
#25 – “If not overused or used for the wrong reasons, spankings will positively shape your kid’s behavior. It’s the ones who get grounded or get their game machines taken away who turn out to be mouthy little psychos.”
Exactly so. The most violent segment of the pop in contemporary America is African-American and Hispanic youth. Gangstas are egocentric sociopaths who have been subjected to little or no properly directed physical discipline.
Children know the difference between being punished for doing wrong and being abused for no reason. And making a strong association in a child’s mind between unacceptable behavior and unpleasant consequences is an important element of discouraging the development of sociopathic violence in adolescence.
No, Michael Fierro, abuse, not discipline, is what leads to violence.
#24, Thomas,
Well put rebuttal. I agree.
#26, I was getting set to argue your point slightly until you clarified everything with your very last line.
abuse, not discipline, is what leads to violence.
Well said.
# 25 & 26, Very well put.
Although I don’t agree with #21 ‘s cookie cutter approach in how to discipline all children as though all children behave exactly the same way, I think each child should be handled on a case by case basis and if spanking is warranted, then so be it. This is where I agree with #24. But please don’t don’t equate it punching or violence.
It’s another tool (not the only tool) to discipline your child into acceptable social behavior. It’s not my business to tell #21 how to raise his child nor is it #21’s business to tell me how to raise mine. As long as there is no abuse involved (in which #21 might insist there is based on his comments), then matters of discipline are best left to the parent.
I have seen way too many times where a parent allows their child to misbehave in public. You cannot deal with all problem children like #21’s “angel”.
The most surprising thing in this post is that John says that he is “no advocate of spanking.” I am surprised by that — I figured he would be a real hard ass at home! 🙂
This is too much, no wonder, this is where Republicans get their power from everything a Liberal Democrat starts to make a stupid rule. Republicans take control Got to control those far right liberals with their unnatural ideas.
spanking has helped me to realize what is good and what is bad, anyone who thinks that is retarded