Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

BlackDracoSLC wrote:

gorgon wrote:Once again we have lots of bad advice from people without any parenting experience.

But we're on an internet forum! I thought that was like THE place for bad advice?

AND WE HAVE A WINNER! WITH AN ASTONISHING KNOCK OUT WITH THE HELP OF COMMON SENSE, BLACKDRACO HAS POINTED OUT THE OBVIOUS!(In a good way)

halonachos wrote:
Also, spanking should be used when NECESSARY, not when the kid's teething, is there no middle ground for you? If the kids being a wretch, a good parent determines the cause of said wretchedness and then works to correct it. If its misbehaviour then spank them or put them in timeout, if they're tired, teething, overstimulated, then remove them from the environment and seek an environment that would fix these needs.

If your children are teething, you use brandy. Works like a charm.

Gitkikka wrote:

Too many posters here assume that toddlers are as rational as a well-adjusted adult.

We have these on dakka ? Where do they post then ?

Very good post, Gorgon.

QFT. And so was yours Mr. Gitkikka.

I wonder how many posters here have parented 2-year-olds.

They're not entirely rational, and they don't speak very well. Some are still babbling. Their vocabularies are very limited. Playing 20-questions doesn't always work. And they change their minds. A lot.

In many ways, they're like Homer Simpson -- "ooh.. donuts!". Or a dog.

A lot of the expectations that some of the posters have seem to fly in the face of reality as I know it.


That said, per my initial post, if it's me, I'm going to jump to self defense of my kid, to the point that the old man is physically incapable of harming my kid. Ever.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I wonder how many posters here have parented 2-year-olds.

They're not entirely rational, and they don't speak very well. Some are still babbling. Their vocabularies are very limited. Playing 20-questions doesn't always work. And they change their minds. A lot.

In many ways, they're like Homer Simpson -- "ooh.. donuts!". Or a teenager

A lot of the expectations that some of the posters have seem to fly in the face of reality as I know it.


That said, per my initial post, if it's me, I'm going to jump to self defense of my kid, to the point that the old man is physically incapable of harming my kid. Ever.

Corrected your typo.

Frazzled saves the day again.

Does babysitting a two year old 5 days a week for 10 hours a day for 3 months count at all?

Yeah, two year olds are like that, but he soon equated me coming to his mom leaving and so he cried. It was at home so I was ableto distract him enough, he also learned that mommy leaving meant getting pizza for dinner so all was good. And who says that they can't rationalize?

Frazzled, as a teen, I am offended by your remark. I don't get distracted by donuts I get distracted by shiny things.

I'm a teen, but I'm not offended. It makes sense really, we always think we're right and we can't decide what we really want. When we do, it's wrong.

Perfectly fair point on the interwebz. LOL.

And believe me, I've walked out of a restaurant or store more than once. Usually that's all it takes to settle my son down, and we're often able to return without incident. You get a surprising amount of empathetic looks from fellow parents when that happens. Then again, there are the folks with that can't stand even 10 seconds of an upset child, and grumble angrily because it's ruined the mood of their big night out at Dennys. I tend not to feel very apologetic to those people, because without question they behaved similarly when they were children. And to be in a kid-friendly environment and expect kids to behave like the Christ child is a bit unrealistic.

@Frazz -- Fortunately I have 11 more years to prepare for the teenage years. Although at least he's a boy. If #2 ends up being a girl, I'll probably require therapy when she hits her teens.

Teenagers...oh man...dear lord give me the patience to not kill them, and the good sense not to annoy everyone with prideful pics of their latest achievement.

I hope that I can look back at these years and think " what an idiot I was". In fact, I probably will. And then I will do my best to understand MY teenagers, and fail hopelessly.

Exactly so, guys - when the kid becomes too noisy, it's time for a walk, either inside or outside. If it's a lot of back-and-forth, that's how it goes.

But seriously, you just can't expect a little kid to sit at a table once the little belly is full, watching everybody else quietly.

frazzled wrote:Teenagers...oh man...dear lord give me the patience to not kill them, and the good sense not to annoy everyone with prideful pics of their latest achievement.

Look at what I made!

JohnHwangDD wrote:Exactly so, guys - when the kid becomes too noisy, it's time for a walk, either inside or outside. If it's a lot of back-and-forth, that's how it goes.

But seriously, you just can't expect a little kid to sit at a table once the little belly is full, watching everybody else quietly.

Actually, when my little brother makes too much noise I yell "Blood for the blood god!" and hit him. Then everyone at the table stares at me as I look nervously around, wondering why I'm not on dakka anymore.

Nightwatch wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Exactly so, guys - when the kid becomes too noisy, it's time for a walk, either inside or outside. If it's a lot of back-and-forth, that's how it goes.

But seriously, you just can't expect a little kid to sit at a table once the little belly is full, watching everybody else quietly.

Actually, when my little brother makes too much noise I yell "Blood for the blood god!" and hit him. Then everyone at the table stares at me as I look nervously around, wondering why I'm not on dakka anymore.

But you don't do it to someone else's kid. They might threaten to exterminate you and your entire family.
Gee I don't know anyone who's ever done that.

Toddlers are toddlers, they cry. Get over it.

Do you expect parents to leave there trolly full of items and leave?

There little kids, forgive them. They dont want to ruin your shopping trip, do they.

I didn't see this in the posted article:

A police report says after the stranger hit the girl at least four times, he said: "See, I told you I would shut her up."

Roger Stephens of Stone Mountain is charged with felony cruelty to children. It was unclear if he had an attorney and a telephone call to his home Wednesday was unanswered.

He's been charged with FELONY cruelty. Good someone understands the seriousness of this. He struck the child 4 times. I'm seriously shocked bystanders didn't lay into him-assuming they didn't.

Frazzled wrote:Teenagers...oh man...dear lord give me the patience to not kill them, and the good sense not to annoy everyone with prideful pics of their latest achievement.

Frazzled wrote:
He's been charged with FELONY cruelty. Good someone understands the seriousness of this. He struck the child 4 times. I'm seriously shocked bystanders didn't lay into him-assuming they didn't.

They were probably worried that he was armed with a gun and...I kid, I kid, I kid...

..the difference being that a felony charge means he can do time AND lose certain privileges etc yes ?

The original story aside, there are FAR worse things a parent can do than smack their child.

1) Feed them junk food all of the time
2) Not encourage an active life style
3) Fail to support school by attending parents evenings, ensuring homework is done, etc..
4) Fail to offer encouragement and love
5) Argue incessantly with partners
6) Use the TV as a childminder
7) Allow their child to fall into poor personal hygiene habits

Of course, just as there is a scale for smacking that moves from acceptable to unacceptable and then into abuse, there are differing levels of each of the above, and it is not as simple as saying "do this, don't do this..."

A parent who smacks their child for bad things (within reason, of course) and praises and rewards them for doing well is infinitely better than one who does neither of those things. In my experience as a teacher, bad parents can improve, given help and advice. Disinterested parents are best off having their kids taken away from them.

OK quickie tutorial

Felonies are the serious crimes. Misdemeanors are usually penalties of one year or less jail time.

Felonies are generally one year or over and you get to go to a more serious full blown prison-unless you're and bilk people out of billions of course then its club fed.
Capital level felonies allow you to experience the thrill of hoping the governor calls...

So who gets to decide what level you can charge them with then ? I'm assuming there's obvious IT HAS TO BE crimes ( murder, rape, red wine with fish, that kind of thing) but from what you posted before there's at least 2 levels of cruelty as an option ? Call of the officers/people involved or established guidelines ?

Police initially then prosecutors. I do believe same as there.

Yes established guidelines in the statute and case law.

I'm sure they'll settle for a misdemeanor with heavy fine, unless there are other factors here.

halonachos wrote:This isn't in england though. Its america, "land of Wal-Mart and Processed Foods and evil guns" remember, theres a wal mart down every corner and 50+ stores around them. This was an "aunt" who was looking after the kid so she was babysitting and leaving the store was a great option.

Where are you getting this from? It was the girl and her mom - the aunt wasn't in the store. And call me crazy, but I didn't always call a relative to watch my kids everytime I had to go shopping. I will not speculate why she didn't hand the toddler off to the aunt, of if she has an S.O. to watch them or whatever, but sometimes us parents do like the company of our kids.

halonachos wrote:@gitkikka- I don't see anything there that leaving the store wouldn't have resolved.

Toddlers can speak, sure they don't know the dictionary, but they can speak enough. If the toddler can't, then leave the store and teach him/her.

It's a Wal-Mart - not a fancy restaurant, or movie theater. Even without kids, those stores are noisy and chaotic. If you want a relaxing shopping experience, go to a 24 hour WM after midnight when the children are in bed. And I didn't say toddlers can't speak, I said that they are poor at getting their point across. This alone can make a happy, cheerful kid bottom out on the frustration scale in no time at all, usually with no warning.

halonachos wrote:If the child was miserable, then why continue that misery by keeping the child in an unknown environment instead of a house where napping places, toys, or other accoutrements are located?

Wouldn't know - don't know the mom's situation. Also, see previous note on how quickly a toddler's mood can change.

halonachos wrote:Also, spanking should be used when NECESSARY, not when the kid's teething, is there no middle ground for you? If the kids being a wretch, a good parent determines the cause of said wretchedness and then works to correct it.

Is this directed at me? No gak, a parent should find what's causing their kid's problem. But guess what, unlike a relative or a babysitter, the parent is the one ultimately stuck with the kid and sometimes has to let a non-issue (even a noisy one) wash over them when there's no other option. Again, it was in a Wal-Mart, not a place designed for relaxation; and we don't know what the mom was doing for her kid. In her situation, I'd attempt to help the kid out, but I'm not going to abandon a cart full of groceries just because she's sounding off and some strangers are giving me the hairy eyeball.

Fifty wrote:The original story aside, there are FAR worse things a parent can do than smack their child.

1) Feed them junk food all of the time
2) Not encourage an active life style
3) Fail to support school by attending parents evenings, ensuring homework is done, etc..
4) Fail to offer encouragement and love
5) Argue incessantly with partners
6) Use the TV as a childminder
7) Allow their child to fall into poor personal hygiene habits

Of course, just as there is a scale for smacking that moves from acceptable to unacceptable and then into abuse, there are differing levels of each of the above, and it is not as simple as saying "do this, don't do this..."

A parent who smacks their child for bad things (within reason, of course) and praises and rewards them for doing well is infinitely better than one who does neither of those things. In my experience as a teacher, bad parents can improve, given help and advice. Disinterested parents are best off having their kids taken away from them.

i have to agree here. I got hit a lot as a child, and i think i can fairly say without fear of contradiction that i turned out all right, with a fair amount of respect for other people and not that large an ego. Not mentioning any names (you wouldn't know them anyway!) but I know several kids whose parents never hit them and they're all jerks. And its incurable. Unless their parents smarten up and hit them already.

Why is it right to hit children and wrong to hit adults?

Kilkrazy wrote:Why is it right to hit children and wrong to hit adults?

I would say it's wrong in both cases, with large but distinct exceptions.

It's ok to spank or hit a child if there is no other way to to communicate with them, especially when very young. Telling a 2 year old repeatedly not to touch glasses may or may not work, slapping their hand usually does.

A person is allowed to use force against another when they have a right to compel behavior and no other options are viable. So cops can hit a guy resisting arrest, and a parent can smack a kid that wont do what he's told.

So in effect, a person in lawful authority has the moral and legal right in particular circumstances to compel obedience by the use of force.

Was the old man in WalMart in a position of lawful authority over the child?

Fifty wrote:The original story aside, there are FAR worse things a parent can do than smack their child.

1) Feed them junk food all of the time
2) Not encourage an active life style
3) Fail to support school by attending parents evenings, ensuring homework is done, etc..
4) Fail to offer encouragement and love
5) Argue incessantly with partners
6) Use the TV as a childminder
7) Allow their child to fall into poor personal hygiene habits

Nice, I'm in the plus points for not doing all of those, and I've elected to never hit them as well, do I get bonus points.

Kilkrazy wrote:So in effect, a person in lawful authority has the moral and legal right in particular circumstances to compel obedience by the use of force.

Was the old man in WalMart in a position of lawful authority over the child?

No he was not, as he had no legal status as guardian over said child.

On another note I have seen this degrade into a completely different argument. Instead of focusing on the issue of the man's moral and legal implications in hitting someone else's child, this has turned into a rather strange discussion on child rearing. I think we can all, or at least the vast majority, agree that no person should ever use corporal punishment on another person's child, unless it is with their express authority. That being said it is very obvious that not was this man violating this idea he was also NOT employing corporal punishment, but was very much assaulting that toddler. By doing so I do believe that he deserves prison time.

I am frustrated though by the constant back and forth in this thread. There is the one camp that is very much opposed to the use of corporal punishment and they believe they do so from a non-existent moral high-ground. The other is generally arguing for more traditional methods of discipline, with many not acknowledging the possibility that corporal punishment is not effective for every child. Judging from my own experience, corporal punishment is a very effective tool for raising children. My parents were both keen on using the belt, ladle, shoe etc. but always came in afterward and apologized for spanking us and explained why they hated doing something that was for our own good. I can tell you this, we generally deserved our swats, and I think that it helped to mold all of the kids in our family in to proper adults. That being said the parent must use sound judgment, which will come with experience, in deciding the best course of discipline for their own children. If they are a responsible caring parent then the child will definitely have a better chance of becoming a well-adjusted individual. But as always it is and always should be up to the individual parent. End rant.

Also, for all you parents out there, please don't talk down to us youngins. We may not have experience raising our own children, but that certainly doesn't mean we haven't observed others raising their kids, not to mention our own experiences with our parents. I know that I probably pissed everyone off in this thread with this post, but o well. KK will denounce me as an evil American, Frazzled will blather on about GK and her unstoppable hoards (ever built a great wall Fraz? Or just call Mulan if that doesn't work. ), and Wrex will continue to post nonsensical pictures. LOL, so much for my PR degree....