Comments on: Clark defends smacking bill going to select committee

By: Sparx

Sparx — Sat, 30 Jul 2005 10:41:08 +0000

Stephen,

Hear! Hear!

By: Stephen

Stephen — Fri, 29 Jul 2005 04:35:41 +0000

My apology.
I meant to say that in 20 years of pastoral care as a social worker, probation officer etc with a degree in Social Sciences in NZ I’ve never seen ANY CONCLUSIVE RESEARCH which shows stopping smacking as a form of discipline reduces child abuse.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:32:31 +0000

Hey Dave,
Well bugger me. Not one single solitary research source offered to back the assertion that those kids who recieve corporal punishment develop anti-social behavior as a consequence. Funny that.

Oh my God. It seems to me that your real agenda is coming out. Support the anti-smacking bill Childless Bradford is pushing.

Listen. Nobody short of a psychopath wants anything which will see kids traumatised.
But there’s such a thing as reasonable, and sadly I need to say I don’t see that in your attitude. At least not on this issue.

You say you advocate anti-smacking as a law in place to give cops/doctors etc time to intervene, presumably because you see smacking as a precursor to violence and trauma.
Well, whilst it’s a laudable aim to erradicate such trauma, do you for one moment think a law against smacking is going to stop some Mom from suffocating her kid with a pillow?
Is it going to stop some Dad from coming home pissed and belting up his kids?
Idealistically you might answer yes.
Knowing that heavy legal sanctions (like prison for instance) ALREADY EXIST against such abusive behaviors and having done my ‘time in the trenches’ of NZ social services wher I’ve seen such events close up I think differently.

Indeed I dare say all you’ll end up achieving is criminalizing those legions of loving parents/grandparents etc who administer a quick tap to a kid who’s too young and/or self absorbed to know thier doing something dumbassed and dangerous.

Talk about taking a sledgehammer to crack a hazelnut!

And you have the gaul to infer I’m the one here being primitive! LOL!

Still I can take some comfort in a very recent NZ Stuff News pPll which showed overwhelming support to throw out Bradford’s kiddy-Bill.

By: dave

dave — Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:38:48 +0000

I’m assuming you meant INDISPUTABLE and not INCONCLUSIVE.
Owning up to the fact that no research in an area such as this is indisputable, I will still share this with anyone interested.
My thoughts and concerns in this area are indeed not based on INCONCLUSIVE research. They are based on my own education and common sense and loathing of violence against defenseless children that can and has led to ASB and death.

http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/frame.html

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:57:11 +0000

Another thing Dave,
with degrees in Social sciences and Education on top of 20 years working and studying pastoral services I’ve never seen ANY INCONCLUSIVE RESEARCH ANYWHERE which supports the idea that corporal punishment creates anti-social behavior in it’s recipients futher down the track. Indeed the research I looked at in this area when working at Paremoremo Prison showed that violent offenders generally fell into 2 categories. One category had been severely beaten as kids (we’re not talking about anything remotely like a well judged timely smack here. We’re talking about baseball bats, chairs and alkathane pipe stuff). The other category had such lenient parenting that precious little in the way of boundaries was set for them. They gradually became more errant and aggressive without due enforcement of guidance.
So I’d be very interested to see your sources.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:21:39 +0000

Dave,
Further condescenscion inferring those of us who thoughtfully chose to administer a smack occasionally to curtail harm to a child are barbaric and violent. Talk about overinflated PC spin! Its the sort of uncompromising over the top PC attitude that gives me the shivers. It reminds me of the hostile NZ feminists I met who would declare shrilly and self righteously overly inclusive definitions of sexual abuse.

Demonise me, I’ll still be here. You’ll still be there. And there are reasons for that.
But I guess from what you’ve said so far you wouldn’t appreciate knowing why I think so.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 19 Jul 2005 01:09:15 +0000

Wow Dave.
You reckon smacking is “not a thought out action” Oh dear. I didn’t know you lived inside my head. Tell me what am I thinking right this moment? Patronising psychobabble perhaps?

You “reckon you don’t resort to “primitive” methods of discipline” which you see as “barbaric” and that “hitting a child and restaining a criminal aren’t the same”.
Oh my god. I reckon many of the crims I talked to in prison and as a Probation Officer would crack up over that one!
(Think outside your current frame of reference here >> Cosh = restain, Pepper spray = restain, Water cannon = restrain. Are we on the same page yet?)
Come to think of it my students would crack up too! But then they’re not living in PCNZ but ROK (From ashes to Number 6 economy in 50 years flat – tell me about an incredibly disciplined people!!!!)

You’re not going to guilt trip me by inferring I and the legion of other well respected Teachers here are “primitive” and “barbaric”.
I used to think in such a patronising, smug and condescending way. But then I spent time here and scales fell from my eyes.

By: Sparx

Sparx — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 05:13:26 +0000

Apologies Emma, I should have included this link for you:

Labour Government’s feminist agenda undermines the family. (Dr M Newman)

It provides some excellent background on some of the recent acts by clark and her cronies against The Family.

Stay healthy and happy!

By: Sparx

Sparx — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 05:09:35 +0000

Emma,

In my own mind, there is a huge distinction between smacking a child and physical abuse, which seems to be what this proposed legislation is directed at stopping.

In my humble opinion, the decisions around smacking or not depend very much on circumstance and I have, in the past, used a light, quick smack to stop dangerous behaviour and then only if other methods have not yielded a result. Liek Stephen I also follow this up with a discussion of why we reached this point and how it can go better next time. My Team are great and this is very seldom a situation that arises.

However, I believe that other methods of disciplining children effectively have equally bad side effects. For example, a Mum I know uses the “stand in the corner” option and my reading tells me this has disastrous effects on the child’s self-image and self-worth.

It also appears, that a large part of our high youth-suicide, high teen pregnancy and high youth-crime rates come back to the dis-assembly of The Family in New Zealand by clark and her fellow feminist extremists. Some of these behaviours must come back to a basic lack of discipline as a child that has failed to teach logical consequences, responsibility and accountability. My Team all understand they can make choices, but they must be prepared to stand by the outcome and be accountable for their actions.

“responsibility and accountability” is a very simple lesson most of our current elected representatives could do with learning. They need to start taking responsibility for their decisions/actions and being accountable for the outcomes.

clark is so far into cuckoo-land that while she rushed to sign up to the Kyoto protocol [against the advice she was provided], she has consciously chosen that NZ will not sign up to the United Nations Doha Declaration which seeks to support the traditional family and encourage marriage. When will her acting out of her childhood issues stop?

By: Stephen

Stephen — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 17:07:02 +0000

Emma,
calling something as long thought-through as my smacking a child seems matronisingly insulting to me (My second major is in ethics). When a kid is doing something half-brained and dangerous I’ll administer a quick smack to jolt them to awareness. Then I’ll explain why I did so. And despite your comments with no shame or remorse whatsoever.

I invite you to think of it this way. It’s no different than a cop PHYSICALLY RESTRAINING you with handcuffs or a baton if you’re doing some dumb-ass thing that is endangering yourself and others.
So note this – I’M VERY THANKFUL MY FOLKS AND OTHER ADULTS SMACKED ME AS A KID.
Geddit?