Court reverses spanking ruling, ends family's nightmare

The father should have had someone bigger than him whack him 36 times with a maple paddle.

 

No children here (yet, 18w along) but it seems to me if you have to hit your child (of any age) 36 times, then you've got major problems that go way beyond the powers of a spanking to fix.

Also, 36 times is NOT a spanking, it is abuse, and most likely there was anger involved (IMO). Ugh.

 

Yes, I agree TC2. Children are a precious gift, and are to be lovingly and kindly taught, not beaten senseless with a hard object.

 

Agreed, and I just think that by age 13, you really need to have moved on to other forms of discipline. I wonder how the rest of this childs life under his parents roof will go.

Why wasn't the father (and mother as well) urged if not forced, to take parenting/discipline classes to learn to handle such situations better?
B/c if spanking is all you got at 13, you're going to have major problems
on down the line, I think.

 

Each child is different, and it was determined the child was uninjured. I've never counted my spanks on my kids, but some required about 10 seconds of non stop spankings. Pain is required, injury is not. Barb could beat on them an hour, and they'd just laugh. Our worse offender, woke up at around 14, so his spankings ended then. Most of ours were of good discipline by 8-9...

 

You cannot teach not violence by using violence.

 

Prov 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Prov 23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.

Prov 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.

 

So you had better follow the Bible to the letter.

From Deuteronomy
21:18If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
21:19Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
21:20And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21:21And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear

 

You obviously either don't rightly divide the Word of God, or you desire the absolute rebellion of children that satan is so actively engaged in. Your statements suggest both.

There is more teenage rebellion today than ever before, and that is largely a result of not being corrected when children. Many have been left to themselves in this culture, which is their parents responsibility.

Spanking is not violence, but correction.

 

If it is done 36 times it could be. If the father was livid before hitting his daughter, he can go ballistic on her.
Faithgirl

 

Beaten senseless? Oh, I get it-- the location the beating must have been where the kid's brains were.

Okay, if you want to teach a kid to not jab people with a sharp object, then don't take them to the doctor where they might get a shot, which teaches them the opposite.

 

I don't have a problem with spanking your children when it's needed. But I do think that 2 or 3 swats is sufficient, 36 excessive. And by the time a child is 12 or 13 they should either know better or another form of discipline should be used. Spanking is for children not teenagers.

 

The court seemed unwilling to say all spanking is bad, you can't do it, so this joker who hit is kid 36 times (are you kidding me) gets off. It seems to me they didn't want to "outlaw" spanking entirely because of the actions of one guy with a paddle.

 

Can you teach that locking a child up in a small room and only allowing him out for one hour a day is wrong by locking someone up in a small room and only allowing him out for one hour a day?

Obviously, your argument is bankrupt. It simply doesn't work.

But in any case, spanking isn't violent.

 

In rare instances, I can see spanking being effective. But usually, violence begets violence.

Spanking is violent. The same act is considered physical abuse when it is carried out onto a spouse or any other human being.
Generally, when people know how to parent, they don't need to resort to that kind of bullying of their children. There are many other methods available which usually work.

Very few parents here spank their kids yet we have the lowest crime rate around. Even then, I would guess it is just a few swats when the kids were toddlers.

Overall, the kids here are very well-behaved because we have well behaved parents

 

Spanking is not violence.

 

Come over here and bring a paddle, and I'll see how violent you think it is when I am paddling you! :thumbs:

 

That's exactly what I wanted to type in my last post! :laugh:

 

No wonder violence gets worse as time goes on. Most of these people who say you should not spank a child, don't even have any children in the first place.

If your child knows that you will spank him or her, that usually is enough to cause them to be obeident, without a spanking. If your child knows you are going to say "honey don't do that", they probably will give you the finger. (excuse the plain language)

My wife taught school for over 30 years and would have taught longer, except for the fact they took all decipline away from the teachers.

We give away our land, our rights and even the right to raise our children to be good people. Amazing what we have done to ourselves!!!

BBob,