Punish or not?

Question

heared about a law that is in consideration on california, that would make it illegal for a parent to spank or otherwise physicly punish a child younger than the age of 4.

what do you think? how far can the goverment go with invade out private lifes? in my opinion, a well deserved claps on the butt never hurt (not talking about beating the crab out of the kids, that's BS) i was rised the way that when i did something wrong, i had a spangking coming, and it did not make me a violent, bad, blind person..... opinions?

yea, when are we being told by the law, when to put the kids to bed?

Answer 1

I'll have to agree on this. You spare the rod you spoil the child. A little tap on the bottom with a good explaination and the child won't repeat that behavior. In most cases they won't. The government needs to learn when and where to fight it's battles. This along with Iraq they need to pull away from.

Answer 2

I have heard of several similar proposed laws.

A US parent on vacation in Ontario had his children apprehended by Child & Family Services for a SINGLE swat on his 4 year-old daughter's bare rear - delivered in public - for deliberately slamming her 2 year-old brother's hand in the car door after being specifically told not to.

The charge filed (and later dismissed) was for child abuse (the spanking), and not for dropping her drawers. Something like 4 months later the children were returned to the parents, and the father was allowed to return to the US (he'd been on parole and not allowed to leave the country).

A "concerned citizen" reported the parents.The courts tossed the charge because the parents explained exactly how and why the girl was spanked, and because the *single* blow was deemed as being a legitimate and appropriate punishment.

I freely agree that the appropriate agencies should err on the side of the child, but when children are being apprehended for flasified charges of child abuse because the child was not allowed desert, to watch TV, stay-up as late as they wanted, etc...they are going WAY too far!

Answer 3

THE LAW IS STUPID, TO SWAT A CHILD UNDER FOUR ON THE BUTT WILL NOT HURT THEM. I GOT MY BUTT SWATTED AND A LITTLE ADDED TO IT AND IT DIDN'T HURT ME IN ANY WAY. I SWATTED MY TWO CHILDREN WHEN THEY WERE GROWING UP. THIS IS WHATS WRONG WITH OUR YOUTH TODAY, THEY TELL THE PARENTS WHAT TO DO. I HEARD ON THE NEWS TODAY WHERE A CHILD AND HER PARENTS WERE PUT OF A PLANE, BECAUSE OF THE TANTRUM THE CHILD WAS PITCHING. WHAT IS IT COMING TO.

Answer 4

Why would you want to hit a three year old child anyway? Any parent who does that doesn't deserve to be a parent! Besides any child who is hit only cries and throws a louder tantrum. You get much better results with a carrot, not a stick.

Teenagers? That's another story!

Answer 5

The law should be shot. Frankly, if I lived there I would move with my children and leave it to those that want to drown when the big earthquake hit.

Answer 6

I agree with you. The extremists have gone way too far in their definition of "abuse". It's another case of a few trying to control the majority when they don't agree with their simple little ideas.

Answer 7

I have some wrist issues because i have performed piano because i become 3 and that i write plenty. i myself understand someone who had the surgical procedure and he or she become playing the violin interior of a month, if i'm remembering wisely.

Answer 8

No good law. I was smacked and im fine. I don't hate my parents but i do respect them. I don't agree with belting your kids or using utensil (wooden spoon) or cords tho.

Answer 9

I also agree with everyone else. Thats why kids are the way they are today. Your not allowed to punish them.