Posted on 06/15/2011 3:21:35 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative
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.