Father slaps Daughter!...

[Jimuew]

<LEFT>

I would like to provoke some healthy debate and discuss some issues around different aspects of both good and bad parenting skills and practices. Firstly, a story that hit the media in 2008 when a father who slapped his daughter was arrested and cautioned by the police. At the time this provoked much discussion as to the rights and wrongs of parents disciplining their children and also the legal procedures and police actions within a domestic violence situation. What do you think now and then do you still feel the same after reading or hearing the full story?​

</LEFT>

 

[MomoJA]

I've stated my strong opinion several times about spanking (not abuse) being a criminal offense. I think it is hysteria and I think going down that road is not only, excuse me, ridiculous, but dangerous. While I'm going to say this very clearly some will still totally miss the point because they will be so distracted by the topic of spanking to realize that this topic is the criminalization of spanking not the effectiveness or even the negative effects of spanking, but I am NOT DEFENDING SPANKING.

There are many ways that people parent that I would disagree with. I've seen the results of bad parenting totally removed from spanking or not spanking. I've seen children completely handicapped due to bad parenting skills, and we are talking parents who regardless of whether or not they spank are inconsistent, unconcerned about certain antisocial behaviors, and who indulge their children in arguments and negotiations. Shall we criminalize that sort of parenting? It is much more permanently destructive of the child than spanking. How do we go about criminalizing that? It would be impossible and I wouldn't want to begin. The idea is abhorant.

I didn't need to read the article to support my feelings, but it does begin to illustrate the hysterical aspect of criminalization.

You can't legislate good parenting. You can only educate, and there has to be room for choice and for mistakes. We are parents. We aren't robots. We will parent badly. Any parent who thinks he or she doesn't sometimes parent badly is probably the worst parent out there. There are actually arguments that spanking is not bad parenting. Let's at least start with a common parenting technique that is not arguably effective such as screaming at your child. But then, come lock me up because I am guilty of having screamed at my child.

 

[Jimuew]

Hi MomoJa
Bringing up children, as we know, is a learning process that I believe starts when we are children ourselves, and the experiences of being parented are the starting point of our future parenting knowledge.
We can either agree or disagree with one aspect or another of how our parents brought us up and continue to develop from this time and experience.
Having said this, there are other factors and life experiences that also impact on our thinking.
So let's say you firmly believe or don't believe in physical punishment one way or another, you can debate the rights and wrongs of this point and in doing so at least hear the opposite side of the debate.
Personally I don't agree with smacking children and firmly believe this is not the answer to any problem.
As for as the father who slapped his daughter I can tell you that he never smacked any of the four children that he brought up except for this incident he had and has continued to positively support his children without any other incidents. I know this to be true because I am that father and my daughter is 16 now and doing well in her life and we have a fantastic father/daughter relationship and very close and supportive to each other as well as my other children.

 

[IADad]

Well congrats on never going back to that Jim. I understand why people think hitting children helps them. I think it does change behavior, but it also foosters other behaviors, and as you say teaches them to parent that way.

I used to think that spanking in very limited cases was okay, like when you needed to impress upon a child the severity of a situation, like potnetial bodily danger if they do whatever they've done again. But I don't thaink that's evena good reason. There are other ways to teach and we owe it to kids to do so. That being said I think there are other bad techniiques. I know I sometimes show my anger by yelling. I've gotten much better at not doing it. Controlling your anger so you don't hit, don't yell is the biggest part of chosing to do something positive. We only have so many years to build their trust, their admiration, their sense of who they are. Let's not wreck it by yelling and hitting.

That's my view.

 

[johndoesix]

Well congrats on never going back to that Jim. I understand why people think hitting children helps them. I think it does change behavior, but it also foosters other behaviors, and as you say teaches them to parent that way.

I'm curious if you mean that it fosters violent behavior on the childs part? I've seen that argument before and I agree in some cases, but in other cases, I think it's just an excuse for not <U>taking responsibility</U> on both the parent and child's part.

 

[NancyM]

I'm a little skeptical regarding why Mr. McCullough was dismissed from his job. That seems a little much to me. If he were such a wonderful man, would they really fire him from his 15 year job?? After all he was just cautioned? Not likely.

I don't approve of striking anyone to 'shock ' them into understanding what YOUR trying to explain to them. That's basically what he was doing.

I also find it interesting how he felt he didn't need 'solicitating" I suppose that means a lawyer to represent him. Why not? If someone is acusing you of something your denying, why wouldn't you want a lawyer to speak in your behalf, unless you had more to hide. Sorry I don't buy his story.

I don't believe that he never hit his child before, that's even more surprising to me that he decided to strike her now! I don't know sounds like there is a lot more to this story than what is in that news clipping.

 

[IADad]

I'm curious if you mean that it fosters violent behavior on the childs part? I've seen that argument before and I agree in some cases, but in other cases, I think it's just an excuse for not <U>taking responsibility</U> on both the parent and child's part.

not taking responsibility? I don't get that at all. Not spanking doesn't mean not disciplining. Who ever said, don't correct, don't discipline a child. And no, my reason is not so much fostering violent behavior as much as it teaching that striking another person is a reasonable reaction. If we can effectively teach our kids to deal with their anger by demonstrating appropriate ways, aren't they better off?

That being said, I'm far from perfect. DS2 lied to me last night and I reacted by swatting him 3 times on the bottom (with his shorts and underpants on) and sending him to his room. Furthermore, after he'd had some time to thinkI went to his room and confronted him about whether he was going to lie to me again. Thinking back on it, I was using fear and intimidation, not the way I want to parent. But I can't take it back. I can only try to to better next time.

 

[parentastic]

Thinking back on it, I was using fear and intimidation, not the way I want to parent. But I can't take it back. I can only try to to better next time.

Actually, IADad, I believe you CAN take it back and it is never too late to do so! Here is how:
Go back to your son and tell him that you had time to think this through, and although it was WRONG of him to lie to you, it was also wrong of you to spank him. Then ask for his forgiveness. In turn, this also opens up a powerful discussion about being wrong but admitting it, and how we can truly solve problems together by being truthful.

Be well,
Nicolas

 

[parentastic]

I don't believe that he never hit his child before, that's even more surprising to me that he decided to strike her now!

I have to say, Jimuew, that this had me puzzled too, just like NancyM.

I could see a parent who had never hit his child before, during the past 15 years, suddenly lose his control on himself and out of a nervous breakdown, ends up slapping his daughter (and regretting it after).
But you said that you never "lost your temper" and that this was not "made out of anger". So I am getting that it was a conscious decision of yours, as you put it: "to shake her".

So I am wondering, why now? If you had never use violence before, what was different that time? And if your relationship was so close and warm and good with her, why did she decide to go to the police in the first place?

I am not here to judge anyone, so pardon me if I am not offering a lot of support right now. But I just don't get your story. It's like a fairy tale with only one side of the story - it feels like big chunks are missing - such as the whole emotional side to it.

Nicolas, Family Life Educator

 

[momat18]

i think it is really stupid. parents should not be treated like that. if a father is good natured and doesnt abuse his children and only spanks on rare occasions, then there is no harm in it. it must be for the good of the children. it doesnt even provoke violent behaviors in kids because if they are always loved by their parents and only hit rarely, they would feel the severity of the situation and would realize their mistake.

sometimes, a parent acts on instinct and feels like their child really deserve the slapping. it is better to slap a child and stop him than let him do bad things that will cause him trouble in the future.

however, i do not mean that the parents should spank every time a child does something wrong. they should spank only once or twice in their lifetime and if the child continues to carry on his bad behavior, then the parents should seek other alternatives.

the american system really needs to bring some changes and needs to bring better judgement

 

[MomoJA]

I'm a little skeptical regarding why Mr. McCullough was dismissed from his job. That seems a little much to me. If he were such a wonderful man, would they really fire him from his 15 year job?? After all he was just cautioned? Not likely.

This took place in Great Britain, so I can't speak authoritatively about it, but here, in my state, to work around children, we have to be fingerprinted and have an FBI background check. I just did it for the 5th time, each time I've changed teaching jobs. Even substitute teachers cannot work for our district if they have any record of assault, even, sometimes, if it was dismissed. It's called "zero tolerance."

I don't want to come off sounding harsh, but it is exactly this sort of response, what I call the flypaper effect, that makes these incidences even worse. Once accused, no matter what he does, he only proves himself guilty.

 

[MomoJA]

I also find it interesting how he felt he didn't need 'solicitating" I suppose that means a lawyer to represent him. Why not? If someone is acusing you of something your denying, why wouldn't you want a lawyer to speak in your behalf, unless you had more to hide. Sorry I don't buy his story.

This is what I mean by my previous post. But also, he wasn't denying that he slapped her. He never denied it, so no one was accusing him of something he claimed he didn't do. I imagine he didn't think he needed a lawyer because he knew it was a hysterical reaction and would be dismissed as such, as it would have been if people were reasonable about this sort of thing. His daughter retracted her charges, but the damage was done. She never accused him of more than the once incident. I don't think she was lying, even if you believe he was.

 

[MomoJA]

Actually, IADad, I believe you CAN take it back and it is never too late to do so! Here is how:
Go back to your son and tell him that you had time to think this through, and although it was WRONG of him to lie to you, it was also wrong of you to spank him. Then ask for his forgiveness. In turn, this also opens up a powerful discussion about being wrong but admitting it, and how we can truly solve problems together by being truthful.

Be well,
Nicolas

But in many countries he would be in jail. And that is the debate. Not whether spanking is good parenting.

 

[parentastic]

I imagine he didn't think he needed a lawyer because he knew it was a hysterical reaction and would be dismissed as such, as it would have been if people were reasonable about this sort of thing.

and yet, MomoJA, here is what he says about his own actions that day:

"I felt that she didn't appreciate the seriousness of it. Simply grounding her wouldn't have proved the point. I felt she needed something to shock her. I was fully in control of my actions."

So it seems that he knew it was not a hysterical reaction, but a thoughtful and deliberate decision.

His daughter retracted her charges, but the damage was done. She never accused him of more than the once incident. I don't think she was lying, even if you believe he was.

How many abused children or battered woman might endure a lifetime of abuse and never find the courage to press charges even once? How many abused people find excuses for their abusers and attempt to protect them? I am not saying this man abused his daughter - we do not know the real full story, only his side of it. But it's <I>possible</I> and this is why, once he has admitted the charges, it doesn't really matter if she retracted herself.

Slapping someone in the face is illegal because it is assault.
It really should not matter whether you do it to your own child or to another adult. It's still not acceptable, and I don't see how one can defend that it should not be made illegal, simply because it's your child?

What I am also interested in, is what lead this adolescent to run to the police and press charges, especially if it truly was the one and only time his dad ever did this. Strange. Why was the father-daughter relationship strained to that extent in the first place?

 

[singledad]

So it seems that he knew it was not a hysterical reaction, but a thoughtful and deliberate decision.

Perhaps MomoJA meant that he reaction by the AUTHORITIES was hysterical?

How many abused children or battered woman might endure a lifetime of abuse and never find the courage to press charges even once? How many abused people find excuses for their abusers and attempt to protect them? I am not saying this man abused his daughter - we do not know the real full story, only his side of it. But it's <I>possible</I> and this is why, once he has admitted the charges, it doesn't really matter if she retracted herself.

Yes, you have a point here. But given this, don't you think some sort of investigation was warranted? Surely, psychological assessment of the daughter could have determined if she was, indeed, abused, and had withdrawn the charge out of fear or because she was conditioned to accept abuse? With this confirmed (or not), they would have been able to respond appropriately, leaving no room for a debate like this...

What I also don't understand about this case is this: if the authorities believed that he could not be trusted around children, why did they not protect his daughter? Conversely, if he can be trusted around his daughter, why not other children?

 

[MomoJA]

Perhaps MomoJA meant that he reaction by the AUTHORITIES was hysterical?

Yes, that's what I meant.

What I also don't understand about this case is this: if the authorities believed that he could not be trusted around children, why did they not protect his daughter? Conversely, if he can be trusted around his daughter, why not other children?

I'm guessing it's that zero tolerance thing. I think everyone knows that he is not a threat to anyone, but the law is the law. A child reports a parent for "abuse," it is recorded, regardless of what happens before or after that. You have an assault record, you can't be around children. No allowances for extenuating circumstances are legally allowed. As long as the laws are written the way they are, no one can really be blamed for him losing his job. The laws would have to be ammended. Their hands are tied by the laws.

 

[MomoJA]

What I am also interested in, is what lead this adolescent to run to the police and press charges, especially if it truly was the one and only time his dad ever did this. Strange. Why was the father-daughter relationship strained to that extent in the first place?

Again, there's that flypaper effect.

Sometimes, teenaged kids lose their way. She sounds like she was an angry child. She was heading toward that edge. Her father slapped her. She was incensed. She hurt him back. She calmed down. She regretted it. But then the wheels were set in motion.

Or he's a big fat liar who is so tyranical that his daughter is afraid of him, even though she was not afraid of him enough to report him for slapping him nor too afraid of him to be openly defiant and taunt a neighbor, but before and since that one incident she is so afraid of him that she continues to say that every thing is hunky-dory, and so do all of his other kids.

 

[MomoJA]

How many abused children or battered woman might endure a lifetime of abuse and never find the courage to press charges even once? How many abused people find excuses for their abusers and attempt to protect them? I am not saying this man abused his daughter - we do not know the real full story, only his side of it. But it's <I>possible</I> and this is why, once he has admitted the charges, it doesn't really matter if she retracted herself.

That was exactly my point. I was responding to the suggestion that the very fact that he didn't ask for a lawyer was proof that this was a pattern. The suggestion was that he must have had something to hide. My point was that he did not deny the charges, i.e. try to hide something. He never realized that a single incident of physically disciplining his child would result in this sort of permanent change in his life. But zero tolerance decided his future.

 

[parentastic]

I'm guessing it's that zero tolerance thing. I think everyone knows that he is not a threat to anyone, but the law is the law. A child reports a parent for "abuse," it is recorded, regardless of what happens before or after that. You have an assault record, you can't be around children. No allowances for extenuating circumstances are legally allowed. As long as the laws are written the way they are, no one can really be blamed for him losing his job. The laws would have to be ammended. Their hands are tied by the laws.

Yeah, I kinda agrees with you on this one, MomoJA, and I understand that in an ideal world, you'd want to give room for flexibility and understanding of the situation. If this had gone to court, and the father had taken a lawyer, rather than admitting his offense directly to the police, who knows? Maybe the hearing would have allowed for these circumstances to be heard and a judge may have decided otherwise. But since the father admitted his deed to a policeman, then the law applies. It is a bad coincidence that the father happens to work with kids all day long and that this specifically ended up with him losing his job.

On the flip side, if you are experienced with kids and you a child professional, <I>shouldn't you know better</I> than to slap a child for "shocking them" ? If that's how he think, then I know I would not want that man to be a coach for my child. Would you?

I can understand parents not wanting that for their children. How do we know the man will not have the same line of reasoning with a kid in his sport team? At this point its no longer about the crime or the punishment or the law. Without this whole events, parents would have never known that their children were entrusted to a man capable of slapping them.

Now they do. They do not want that. Hence he lost his job.

I actually agree with you when you say that admitting it to the police was more a sign that he had nothing to hide. Although we only have one side of the story and we might be wrong about this, I agree he <I>most likely </I>really had nothing to hide. The question is: why did he think it was okay to do this in the first place? Why did he felt <I>entitled </I>to have the right to do this? Would he feel differently about doing this with the children he is entrusted to coach? What would be different about it?

 

[MomoJA]

The question is: why did he think it was okay to do this in the first place? Why did he felt <I>entitled </I>to have the right to do this? Would he feel differently about doing this with the children he is entrusted to coach? What would be different about it?

You'd have to ask him. He was the one who posted the link. He is Jimeuw.

You talk about a coach slapping a child. While I wouldn't want it for my child, and while I would totally agree with a coach losing his job if he did that, the way people react when their own children are misbehaving or when they see their own children making bad decisions is completely different from how they behave when they see children they are instructing doing the same thing. Even if you are not a teacher or coach or the like, you can see the way you tolerate the behavior of your nieces and nephews or neighbor's children and compare it to the way you tolerate your own children's behavior. It's night and day.

But in addition, I'm reminded of the time a fully grown man whom I did not know grabbed me by the arm one Halloween night when I was 14 because there had been some vandalism in the neighborhood. He began dragging me a mile up the road to the guardhouse. I had NOTHING to do with the vandalism, did not know who was responsible, thought it was shameful and never would have taken part in it, but I had just heard about it and seen some evidence of it. At first I started going with him. I was a rule-follower for the most part and had been taught to respect adults (something I'm thankful for.) But my mind started working and I realized that it was going to take 20 minutes or more for him to drag me up there, there were no street lights in my rural neighborhood, and I had done nothing wrong, so I pulled my arm out of his hand. He began accusing me of being an accessory. I denied it. He began pushing me across the street by tapping me forcefully on my shoulders to punctuate each accusation. He asked my name. I told him. He said he would be pressing charges. And I went on my way. I made it home before completely breaking down. I was barely able to tell my dad what had happened through my sobs. I was devastated. I was scared. I was indignant. For years I felt embarrassed to see this man or his family members.

After finding out who the man was through several phone calls, my father spoke to him. He did not back down for several months. He never pursued charges against me - I was not in the wrong, he was. But my point of all this was that while I would never excuse what he did, (and I am equating this with my closest thing to being slapped by a coach although I would presume if my coach slapped me I would have been being pretty disrespectful, something I never was when I was a teenager and in this incidence I was completely innocent) and I was certainly affected by it, it was not the end of my world and it is now an interesting anecdote of my childhood. (I think the man was probably permanently haunted by what he did, but I had not thought of it in years until now and when I've thought of it in the past it has only been with shock at his behavior, not any soul cringing on my part) I suppose I could have been so affected that I never recovered, but I think that would have been insipidly self-indulgent, and my parents would never have tolerated that sort of self-agrandizing self pity. (Something I'm thankful for.)