Posted on 06/15/2011 3:21:35 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
CORPUS CHRISTI - Spanking your kids can send you to jail.
This week, a local woman avoided jail time, but her case made it clear that local prosecutors and judges will not tolerate what used to be a much more accepted practice.
Back in December, police arrested Rosalina Gonzales for Injury to a Child, related to the spanking of her daughter, who was nearly two years old at the time.
It was her daughter's grandmother who noticed red marks on the child's rear end, and took her to Driscoll Children's Hospital to be checked out.
Wednesday, Gonzales was in court to plead guilty to the charge after reaching an agreement with prosecutors.
She'll be on probation for five years and during that time, will have to take parenting classes, follow all CPS guidelines, and make a one-time $50 payment to the Children's Advocacy Center.
But before she was let go, 214th District Court Judge Jose Longoria made it very clear to her and everyone else that even a simple straight forward case of spanking is a crime.
"You don't spank children today," said Longoria, "in the old days, maybe we got spanked, but there was a different quarrel. You don't spank children. You understand?"
Gonzales answered, "Yes, sir."
Gonzales currently does not have custody of the two-year-old victim or her other two children.
She is working with CPS to get them back, but until the state feels that she is ready, the kids will remain with their paternal grandmother.
The Texas Attorney General's office declined to comment today on the legality of spanking.
A spokesman referred us to the Nueces County District Attorney's office, but Mark Skurka did not return our call for comment.
A CPS spokesman did tell us that spanking is considered criminal when it injures a child.
We found the following information on the Texas Attorney General's website under the title "Is Spanking Okay?":
"Texas law allows the use of force, but not deadly force, against a child by the child's parent, guardian, or other person who is acting in loco parentis. Most parents do, in fact, use corporal punishment (in the form of spanking) at least occasionally, and most do not, in fact, consider it abusive. Experts disagree about the advisability of ever spanking a child. Some say that, combined with other methods of discipline, mild spanking of a small child is harmless and effective. Others claim that other methods of discipline work as well as spanking or better, and that spanking is not necessary. Many child advocates and experts in child development contend that all forms of corporal punishment, including spanking, are harmful. Most believe that spanking an infant is always inappropriate. The law does not attempt to arbitrate between the different views on the best method of disciplining a child. What we do know is that severe corporal punishment can be extremely damaging and dangerous, and this is what the law prohibits as abuse."
Just on these facts, it looks like a bad case and a bad precedent. Smells of lackadaisical public defenders too.
This parent, who left noticeable red marks, probably went well beyond what most parents regard as “spanking,” namely a few open-palmed swats to a doubly-clothed tuchus.
Not saying she belongs in jail, but I am saying this is not TYPICAL spanking at issue here, as the lede implies.
Just remember your children don’t belong to you. They belong to the state and the state graciously allows them to be near you. You are responsible for all of their action and you can be put in jail for your children’s actions.
But by God you aren’t allowed to discipline them with spanking in their formative years. We can’t allow well behaved children to disrupt our destruction of the family.
Child’s grandma reported it. If mother ever gets the child back will grandma ever see her again. If it were my child she wouldn’t.
“Spare the rod and spoil the child.”
Maybe there should also be a law that puts parents in jail if they give in their kid’s temper tantrums and spoil them until they become self-entitled brats.
But that’s unlikely to ever happen.
Typical when I was a kid....was getting laid into with a belt...
This is a farce.
It looks like a custody quarrel which the paternal grandmother has won (where is the sperm donor by the way?). The judge calls it “spanking”, and accepts it as normal in the past. I have doubts about this case.
I would agree with you if the kid had been switched to the point of lingering marks or broken skin, but that is not what it says. Poorly written and sketchy article, which is typical of media coverage of legal proceedings.
Hitting a kid who's not even TWO??? That's barbaric. As much as I despise the child welfare state, this woman did a horrible thing and is probably on her way to worse.
I don’t think it is possible to spank and not leave some red marks.
She is unlikely to get more than visitation rights now.
I have seen so many people like her get sold out so that everyone could take an early lunch, or wrap the day’s docket an hour or so early.
Plea deals are very dangerous things, but they are sloth friendly resolutions.
Leaving marks on a child not even two....that’s not spanking in my book. Sounds like a domestic dispute between mom and grandma, and mom sounds like she needs to get a grip.
“Hitting a kid who’s not even TWO??? That’s barbaric.”
That might be true if she had punched her in the face...
A red ass isnt abuse....it’s an attention getter...
EXACTLY what I was thinking.
I tanned my son’s hide just this last weekend for talking back to me in a smart*ss way.
The law in Texas allows spanking but not beating.
I had a deputy sheriff in my house tell a child that her parents could spank her if needed and that he would serve as a witness if she so desired.
“Hitting a kid who’s not even TWO??? That’s barbaric.”
That might be true if she had punched her in the face...
A red ass isnt abuse....it’s an attention getter...
___________________________________
Maybe, maybe not. The article just says “marks”. If we are talking about a patch of rosy cheek from a smack, that is one thing. If we are talking about a criss-cross of hard welts, that is another. The article doesn’t say which it is. Color me cynical that the mother got real representation in this apparent custody quarrel.
Oh for cryin' out loud!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.