Ban Smacking

[Reb]

Why should children be subjected to something that adults are protected by law from doing to other adults.
If children are too young to be reasoned with then what else can be inferred from a grown adult hitting a child.
The "it never did me any harm" brigade may be better off taking a look at their ridiculous point of view and then realising it did harm to their brain power.
Rowls - come and spend a day in my job at Childline listening to terrified young people taking about how scared they are of their parents, listen to hour after hour of horror stories of beatings and neglect - and then stick your pathetic ignorant views where they belong.

[Lord Beamish]

Why should children be subjected to something that adults are protected by law from doing to other adults.
If children are too young to be reasoned with then what else can be inferred from a grown adult hitting a child.
The "it never did me any harm" brigade may be better off taking a look at their ridiculous point of view and then realising it did harm to their brain power.
Rowls - come and spend a day in my job at Childline listening to terrified young people taking about how scared they are of their parents, listen to hour after hour of horror stories of beatings and neglect - and then stick your pathetic ignorant views where they belong.

Oh Reb. Surely you are just demonstrating how liberal, nice and progressive you are. Rowls’ girlfriend has a Degree in Psychology. He knows what he’s talking about.

[dsr]

Why should children be subjected to something that adults are protected by law from doing to other adults.
If children are too young to be reasoned with then what else can be inferred from a grown adult hitting a child.
The "it never did me any harm" brigade may be better off taking a look at their ridiculous point of view and then realising it did harm to their brain power.
Rowls - come and spend a day in my job at Childline listening to terrified young people taking about how scared they are of their parents, listen to hour after hour of horror stories of beatings and neglect - and then stick your pathetic ignorant views where they belong.

There is a problem with the logic of that first sentence. As an adult, I am protected, among other things, from being sent to my room, from being made to sit on the naughty step, from being sent to bed, from being grounded, from having my XBox taken off me, from being forced to eat my cabbage, from being told what time I am allowed to come home, and from being sent to school. So unless you are saying that it's wrong for a child to be subjected to these things ..

The other logic failure is that you see someone doing something illegal (beating their child to the point of terror) and conclude from that that smacking is wrong. It's obviously a valid belief that smacking may be wrong, but not for that reason. It's an overreaction; it doesn't logically follow. It could be compared to knife crime and the rules about carrying knives - it's illegal to attack someone with a knife, so it's often proposed that no-one should carry a knife - as if the people who break the law about slashing people, will obey the law about carrying.

Will the person mentioned earlier on the thread, who kicked his young relative in the head, be deterred because he knows that smacking is illegal? He wasn't deterred by knowing that kicking in the head is illegal.

[Reb]

my sentence construction was slightly out - adults are protected by law from other people hitting them - are we saying that children shouldn't have that same protection.

[Lancasterclaret]

Biggest shock of this whole thread is that Rowls has a girlfriend

[Lord Beamish]

Biggest shock of this whole thread is that Rowls has a girlfriend

He helped her get her Degree, too.

[If it be your will]

my sentence construction was slightly out - adults are protected by law from other people hitting them - are we saying that children shouldn't have that same protection.

He's just saying the law protects adults from lots of things that are considered entirely normal to do to a child. That it wouldn't make sense to apply the same laws to children that we do to adults - like making them sit on the naughty step or grounding (false imprisonment if done to an adult) or removing an Xbox (theft or robbery).

Wherever you stand on smacking, that is a valid point.

Edit. Actually, having thought about it, this really is an interesting point: do all laws that apply to adults also apply to children? Could an adult theoretically be charged with false imprisonment for making their child sit on the naughty step, or are there specific exemptions in law for the parent/child relationship?? I've actually no idea.

Edit II. Having had a look around the answer is 'It's complicated'. Sometimes to the point the law could be seen as contradictory in this area.

[Top Claret]

Ban smoking and carry on smacking

[boatshed bill]

Ban smack!

[Burnleyareback2]

I was just saying the other day that what the world needs is more psychologists out there who had to get help/ cheat to get their jobs.

[holycustard]

Does that include cattle prods.
It worked for me and as an added bonus everytime i get shouted at i do a perfect back flip.

[ClaretAndJew]

https://metro.co.uk/video/father-arrest ... k-2014588/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sure some of you on here will be applauding this bloke.

[taio]

https://metro.co.uk/video/father-arrest ... k-2014588/

Sure some of you on here will be applauding this bloke.

Who?

[ClaretAndJew]

Who?

Read the thread.

[taio]

Read the thread.

I have and still can't see who, as you say, would applaud it. Which people on here do you think would?

[ClaretAndJew]

I have and still can't see who, as you say, would applaud it. Which people on here do you think would?

The ones who think hitting a child which doesn't leave a mark is an appropriate punishment.

[taio]

The ones who think hitting a child which doesn't leave a mark is an appropriate punishment.

Still can't see who would applaud it. Who on this thread do you think would applaud the video you linked?

[ClaretAndJew]

Still can't see who would applaud it. Who on this thread do you think would applaud the video you linked?

Will you feel happy if I name names for you taio?

[taio]

Will you feel happy if I name names for you taio?

I just don't know who you're referring to.

[ClaretAndJew]

I just don't know who you're referring to.

Ok, maybe my post was hyperbolic. I bow down to you taio, I apologise profusely,.

Please forgive me.

[taio]

Ok, maybe my post was hyperbolic. I bow down to you taio, I apologise profusely,.

Please forgive me.

Yes it was. But fair play for recognising it.

[ClaretAndJew]

Yes it was. But fair play for recognising it.

Thank you for forgiving me. I'm really sorry, I won't do it again.

[Walton]

A belated welcome to the bandwagon, Walton.

Although I don't have a masters in psychology I helped write a substantial amount of memoire of my girlfriend's masters in psychology and I'm more than knowledgable enough to post opinions on the subject.

Given that we're all posting our opinions I don't know who isn't "qualified" enough to post here. Maybe you can police all threads in this manner and tell us who is and isn't allowed to voice their opinions?

How to spot a bandwagon, continued:

8. Using humour to hide sheer nastiness

Your girlfriend might get on with my other half, who also read psychology and has since completed two MAs in different areas relating to child development, while working with deprived children.

We apply her knowledge when raising our children, and having been a father for a number of years now, I also feel 'more than knowledgable enough to post opinions on the subject'

I suppose once you've caught up with me on the practical side of things you might also come to my way of thinking.