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.
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.
I don’t think it is possible to spank and not leave some red marks.
The foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of men.
Men are always trying to one up God, with exactly the same results: Failure.
You do not injure your child, you punish in love, but Punish has to get their attention. I'd rather they cry a bit when they are young rather than cry a lot when they are grown unruly adults.
B.S.!
“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.”
If it doesn’t leave marks it isn’t a spanking and any parent that doesn’t spank their kids need to be jailed!
I hate to say it, but there is a race issue here.
I had a neighbor (black) who spanked with a belt or a wooden spoon at least once a week. (She thought it was abusive to use a hand - hands were for “loving” children.)
I’ve used a belt on my fair-skinned son twice in his life. (three strikes each, both times for life-threatening behaviors) and left bruises. He’s bruised with a hand swat.
According to CPS, I’m an abuser, she is not.
My son has a very dark-skinned friend (just graduated high school) who’s parents were horribly abusive. (belts, punching, kicking, etc) and his skin didn’t show marks.
I have a friend who has an *extremely* fair skinned son. (Nordic ancestry) One not-too-hard swat and the kid had a hand-print that would last for hours. (The kid also couldn’t be out in the sun for more than 15 minutes without burning. He still drowns himself in sun-tan lotion every time he leaves the house.)
The darker the child, the less the marks show. Basing judgments of abuse on visible marks is a very poor measure. There are many, MANY dark-skinned children who’re not saved from abuse because of this. I hate to cry “racism”, but this *is* a racist policy.
I hate it when the gov’t decided to ‘make an example’ out of good parents who’ve trying to raise their children to be law-abiding citizens. We have so many parents who’re ignoring their children or defending their children’s poor behavior.