Do you think spanking with pants down is abuse? Abuse as I have defined it below?

Question

This being a spanking done with the HAND on the BOTTOM, leaving NO permanent marks (No bruising, welts, blisters...)

Abuse: meaning that these children should be taken out of the home, and placed in foster care. The spanker thrown in jail, and never have his/her children back. Because, as I see abuse, child abusers should never get a second chance. Are you going to group these parents in that catagory?

I hear the word "abuse" thrown around to much these days. Would you be willing to remove these children permentally from a loving home? Time to play king or queen for a day. If it was up to you. I only ask that you think very hard on it. Remember voting "yes" means a family is torn apart.

Similar question to my last one about using a belt. I want to know how stuck in the old days i am, lol. We never use belts but do pull down pants for a spanking.

Pleas answer the question with a "Yes" or "No" and then state your opinion if you wish.

oops, I forgot to add, spanking this way (pants down) is legal where i live. I just want opinions if YOU HAD THE POWER!! lol
THanks in advance

SieglindeDieNibelunge: Please Grow UP, Go see your parents right away, they need to do some adjusting, (with a sledge hammer) lol. I know your anti spanking, almost all children are. Now GROW UP

Answer 1

No. I think this definition of abuse is poor. If the child is being spanked hand to bare bottom, with not enough force to mark the child I don't even this this is abuse. If it is I'm sure I should be thrown in jail for abusing my husband as I side-kick his butt when we walk hand in hand and I've pushed him off the bed when he's tickled me. That's a lot more force.

Child should be taken away when they are physically, emotionally, mentally or sexually scarred by the intensity and or frequency of attacks. A loving parent disciplining their child on occasion does not come close to abuse.

If the child was restrained and forcefully beaten hand to bare bottom on a regular basis, take the child away.

As for second chances, I believe all people can change. Second chances should be given with EXTREME caution, but not ruled out.

I don't see the behind of a young child as a sexual part. I don't see pulling the pants of a young child down to expose the bottom as humiliation. If you denied them clothes, or exposed their genitalia for touch or TOLD them what the parts are used for by adults... Is this happening in the privacy of a living room or in a shopping mall. Are we talking about correcting a 3 years old or a 13 year old? To many cicumstances to make hardened rules for me, thank you.

Answer 2

I think using a belt, willow switch, yardstick or any object gives the spanker a chance to cool down while getting the object and so is not necessarily spanking out of anger with just hands which could hurt worse and could result more in a beating with the hands because that is instantaneous and ususally the parent is mad.. A spanking on the fanny is not child abuse of course if it doesn't cause damage to the skin. I also think spanking should be used as a last resort when other forms of disciplilne haven't been effective.

Answer 3

I know you request a yes or no but as a mother to five i don't feel you can answer that question that way, there are a lot of factors, First i do not believe in spanking but i also feel a parent has the right to make that decision, how old is the child what did they do, I don't feel the children should be removed but maybe the parents should attend a class on alternatives to spanking, i find most parents who spank do it because they feel there is no other answer, or they know other ways there just too lazy

Answer 4

I would use this method but only under really bad situations. And I would make sure that before the event happened I walk away for 10minutes, and come back to deliver the discipline (To make sure its not done in anger)

This would be a last resort for sure, I find with my two girls, a slap on the hand, a 2 minute time out, or a swat on the bottom (With pants on) normally suffices. She cries, I console her, we talk about why she didn't listen.

But again these methods are all after reasoning has failed, and the child is doing it to spite the adult's authority.

Answer 5

In Sweden its a law against abuse. The socialworkers use it randomly (if they dont like the parent). The Swedish people has no right to control the child at all. Therefore the socialworkers has to get the children sooner or later. Many discover one day when they come home that the kids are in a abusive forster care environment. I think spanking should be legal.

Answer 6

Yes.

I think spanking unruly children is not abusive, but pulling down their pants to do it is not discipline, it's humiliation, which in MY book, is emotional abuse. You're right about the word "abuse" being thrown around too much. But the other side of that is that there is too much emphasis placed on PHYSICAL abuse, and not enough on emotional, verbal and mental abuse...which can sometimes take much longer to heal than physical - if ever. Injuring some little guy's behind is nothing compared to injuring their souls and minds.

Answer 7

NO.

Not at all. I think your right on when it comes to children being taken away just because parents spank them. Nothing wrong with a good spanking. Granted I am bias, since we use the same tactics with our children. However I think it's horrible if a parent were to lose their children under the circumstances you mentioned above. Those of you who answered yes, I don't think you put enough thought in you answer. You would pull these children out of the home? YOUR NUTS.

Answer 8

No.

It is pretty easy to forget that not all that long ago this was considered the way to spank (at least when it was necessary to really drive the point home). It was one of the very first things that the no-spanking movement attacked in their agenda to outlaw spanking totally. It is all based on their neo-Freudian (unscientific) view, first adopted by Dr. Spock in the 1950's, that spanking is inappropriate. They, of course, saw sexual connotations since it was a Freudian interpretation.

Ok--I believe in non-abusive spanking and I think the most effective way to spank is bare bottom. The immediate objectitve of a spanking is to give a meaningful sting without causing injury. This can be difficult to do over layers of clothes (especially diapers)--and I think this is one of the reasons parents will say they tried spanking and it didn't work.

Spanking on the bare skin can give the sting without hitting as hard--so not only is it more effective--it is often safer--swatting over layers of padding a parent might unintentionally overdo it in an effort to make sure it is felt.

I know personally from memories of childhood and from my observations as a Mom that a bare bottom spanking makes a much bigger impression. It is the sting of course, but I also think it gives greater seriousness and solemnity to the punishment.

Answer 9

You may not have legal concerns, but you are teaching these children to associate violence with bad behavior.

So, while it may not be a crime of sorts, it could be construed as physical and/or mental abuse, of which the long-term consequences are unknown.

Answer 10

No, it is not abuse. I was spanked bare bottom as a child. I have three children and I spank all three of them the same way...over my lap, with my hand, on their bare bottom. I have never left a bruise on any of them.