The subjectivity of defining "child abuse"

[DrPhil]

That's another cultural difference. Many cultures do not care about respect (in the "we're both humans, let's talk it out and then walk it out" sense of the word) between parent and child. For example, in Black American culture and other African diaspora cultures, the tendency (WARNING: GENERALIZATION THAT DOESN'T APPLY 100%) is to be stern and invoke fear. It doesn't matter that the child is afraid and only behaving for the time being and to avoid further punishment. The phrase "you better/you're going to respect me" is used in the same manner as not looking adults in the eye unless told to do so. It isn't a parent-child-equal-footing-respect to which mainstream cultures tend to adhere.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

It's crazy that if you were to "spank" or "swat" an adult, it's considered assault or battery, and if you do the same to a dog, it's considered animal cruelty. But go ahead, hit your kid, that's fine (and yes, "swat" and "spank" = hitting).

That's your culture. Your background gives you very specific values and beliefs about child rearing. Those values and beliefs are not universally shared. Some people think that if you don't use corporal punishment, you are a poor parent and different cultures have widely different ideas about the proper way to raise a child.

Because Dr. Spock published his book and you agree with him doesn't make your culture and background more relevant or correct than others.

I try to have an open mind when working child abuse cases. I'm not sure any of us want to live in a country where the government comes into everyone's home and threatens potential criminal action for anyone who doesn't follow the government's plan for child rearing.

We shouldn't be in the business of punishing parents unless it is readily apparent that the parent's intent in hitting the child was to be cruel, to torture, etc.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

That's another cultural difference. Many cultures do not care about respect (in the "we're both humans, let's talk it out and then walk it out" sense of the word) between parent and child. For example, in Black American culture and other African diaspora cultures, the tendency (WARNING: GENERALIZATION THAT DOESN'T APPLY 100%) is to be stern and invoke fear. It doesn't matter that the child is afraid and only behaving for the time being and to avoid further punishment. The phrase "you better/you're going to respect me" is used in the same manner as not looking adults in the eye unless told to do so. It isn't a parent-child-equal-footing-respect to which mainstream cultures tend to adhere.

How do you think that informs future interactions, when that child is an adult?

Not making a judgement, just thinking out loud. This might be off-topic but a couple of years ago I had a coworker who was upset with me because he felt I didn't "respect [him] enough." It seems that, even though he wasn't of the African diaspora, that he had the same thinking that younger people just automatically have to respect their elders whether or not they actually earned it.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

How do you think that informs future interactions, when that child is an adult?

For me and my sister by blood, we're thankful.

Not just the spankings, but the discipline in general we received growing up.

Growing up the mantra from my parents and grandparents was 'If I don't teach you, the law will.'

And we all know that 'the law' is much more severe with AfAm than whites.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That's your culture. Your background gives you very specific values and beliefs about child rearing. Those values and beliefs are not universally shared. Some people think that if you don't use corporal punishment, you are a poor parent and different cultures have widely different ideas about the proper way to raise a child.

Because Dr. Spock published his book and you agree with him doesn't make your culture and background more relevant or correct than others.

I try to have an open mind when working child abuse cases. I'm not sure any of us want to live in a country where the government comes into everyone's home and threatens potential criminal action for anyone who doesn't follow the government's plan for child rearing.

We shouldn't be in the business of punishing parents unless it is readily apparent that the parent's intent in hitting the child was to be cruel, to torture, etc.

I agree.

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

How do you think that informs future interactions, when that child is an adult?

Not making a judgement, just thinking out loud. This might be off-topic but a couple of years ago I had a coworker who was upset with me because he felt I didn't "respect [him] enough." It seems that, even though he wasn't of the African diaspora, that he had the same thinking that younger people just automatically have to respect their elders whether or not they actually earned it.

For some Black people: Choosing aggression, arguments, and violence as a first resort; inability to have even small interactions without it turning into an argument and potentially leading to violence; and an inability to control anger.

For some Black people: Being quiet, reserved, and almost subservient from fear of punishment or any reminders of her/his upbringing.

For some Black people: Becoming opposed to any type of disagreements, anger, tension, raised voices, loud talk, etc. because it reminds the person of her/his upbringing.

[Low D Flat]

We shouldn't be in the business of punishing parents unless it is readily apparent that the parent's intent in hitting the child was to be cruel, to torture, etc.

So if a parent beats a child hard enough to cause broken bones, concussions, death, etc., there shouldn't be any punishment as long as the intent was good?

[ree-Xi]

Originally Posted by Kevin

That's your culture. Your background gives you very specific values and beliefs about child rearing. Those values and beliefs are not universally shared. Some people think that if you don't use corporal punishment, you are a poor parent and different cultures have widely different ideas about the proper way to raise a child.

Because Dr. Spock published his book and you agree with him doesn't make your culture and background more relevant or correct than others.

I try to have an open mind when working child abuse cases. I'm not sure any of us want to live in a country where the government comes into everyone's home and threatens potential criminal action for anyone who doesn't follow the government's plan for child rearing.

We shouldn't be in the business of punishing parents unless it is readily apparent that the parent's intent in hitting the child was to be cruel, to torture, etc.

It certainly was not the culture in which I was raised, which is perhaps why I am so against hitting a child - I remember those punishments vividly.

Again I ask, why is it against the law for me to hit you or an animal, yet okay to hit a defenseless child 1/4 or even half my size as long as my intent wasn't to be "cruel". How is hitting a 3-year old not cruel?

[DrPhil]

It is not against the law to hit an animal. Animal cruelty does not include people who use a rolled up magazine to discipline or train a puppy. There are all types of animal training, breeding, and raising (for food, etc.) techniques that would not be considered animal cruelty.

Sarah McLachlan isn't singing about a puppy who took a dump on the couch and was smacked on the rear in punishment.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Low D Flat

So if a parent beats a child hard enough to cause broken bones, concussions, death, etc., there shouldn't be any punishment as long as the intent was good?

How in the hell did you go there from anything I said above?

Peterson's case involves no broken bones, concussions, death, etc.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

It is not against the law to hit an animal. Animal cruelty does not include people who use a rolled up magazine to discipline or train a puppy. There are all types of animal training, breeding, and raising (for food, etc.) techniques that would not be considered animal cruelty.

Sarah McLachlan isn't singing about a puppy who took a dump on the couch and was smacked on the rear in punishment.

On the other hand, maybe a shock collar or bark collar on a kid would work wonders. Electric fences for kids? I have a feeling that wouldn't fly.

I was spanked 3 or 4 times in my lifetime but my brother was spanked a lot more than I was. Why? When I saw him get spanked, the sibling rivalry thing kicked in and I was determined that the parental units would love me more so I behaved myself.

Every child is different and I agree the lines are subjective but to me, if a permanent mark is left, it was most definitely abuse. Then again, some of the worst abuse is mental and there is no physical evidence at all.

I'm kind of curious- for those who did experience more corporal punishment- Do you think that was the only way for your parents to get you to act right? Do you think lesser punishments would have worked?

For me, growing up and in my own parenting, spanking was the absolute last resort after everything else had been tried and did not work OR when what the child was about to do would harm them far worse than a swat on a diapered butt.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by AGDee

On the other hand, maybe a shock collar or bark collar on a kid would work wonders. Electric fences for kids? I have a feeling that wouldn't fly.

Hey, people already put their kids on leashes. Ya never know!

[als463]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

Hey, people already put their kids on leashes. Ya never know!

At certain daycares like in State College, there's always the "kids on a rope" walking around campus. I like the idea of the stuffed toy backpack leashes for kids, though.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

Hey, people already put their kids on leashes. Ya never know!

I swore I would never put my kid on a leash because it seemed so dehumanizing. Then we were at Sea World when Halo was about 2 1/2. He was so excited he kept trying to get out of his umbrella stroller to see cool stuff and he almost tipped it over a few times. So we let him out of the stroller and then he ran everywhere. I bought a leash that day and used it that day! He was too young to be capable of containing his excitement and stay holding one of our hands and I decided I'd rather have him on the leash than have him get lost. I don't think I ever even used it again after that day, but I did have to admit that sometimes, it's safer to do that than anything else. We all had a lot more fun that day because it ended the battles and kept him safe.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

It certainly was not the culture in which I was raised, which is perhaps why I am so against hitting a child - I remember those punishments vividly.

Good for you and your culture. The United States is a big place with lots of different cultures who all have different ideas on how children should be raised. Even if yours is objectively better than the others, where do you get off telling others what is acceptable?

It's okay to have some community standards and it's okay for the state to protect children from actual abuse, but from corporal punishment? Even corporal punishment which you might subjectively consider cruel? To a degree, yes, because in many cultures, that's how children are raised.

Child Welfare workers are trained a lot in cultural competencies, so they may choose to leave a child from a certain culture with marks from a switch in the home and conclude there's nothing wrong, because it is probable that the child is loved and cared for and has a parent or parents who want to raise them to understand that actions have consequences and to respect authority.

I've read up on the study trying to correlate grey matter/brain structure with corporal punishment, but it fails to explain the causation aspect of the relationship, so it's speculation. And even then, different =/= better.

Again I ask, why is it against the law for me to hit you or an animal, yet okay to hit a defenseless child 1/4 or even half my size as long as my intent wasn't to be "cruel". How is hitting a 3-year old not cruel?

Have you ever ridden a horse? You pull on a strap which yanks on its mouth to make it turn, pull its head back to make it stop.. and to go, you kick that sucker in the ribs... if you're wearing spurs which can make it more painful, I hear that works better... or whip him with the leather straps attached to his face.

I really don't get some animal cruelty laws and especially don't like how they're sometimes applied. And all the stuff Dr. Phil said too.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I swore I would never put my kid on a leash because it seemed so dehumanizing. Then we were at Sea World when Halo was about 2 1/2. He was so excited he kept trying to get out of his umbrella stroller to see cool stuff and he almost tipped it over a few times. So we let him out of the stroller and then he ran everywhere. I bought a leash that day and used it that day! He was too young to be capable of containing his excitement and stay holding one of our hands and I decided I'd rather have him on the leash than have him get lost. I don't think I ever even used it again after that day, but I did have to admit that sometimes, it's safer to do that than anything else.

At that age, they're about as functional as a labrador retriever anway. They respond (sometimes) to commands, can be taught tricks, can fetch and communicate their needs to you sort of effectively.

The lab wins though 'cuz it can be potty trained.

My parents used a leash on me.. probably smart. They also used corporal punishment early and often.