When I said scarring, I wasn't referencing some sort of psychological thing. The kid has very real, permanent scars. You can see them on his limbs. This isn't psychobabble.
What do we have to go on that tells us this was straight malice and or complete intent to injury? Rather than Peterson going over the top with a disciplinary action.
How is going over the top acceptable or okay? I would say that is 99 % of abuse cases, including the Ray Rice instance.
Aside from the pictures, nothing I guess. I have not heard if the kid has made any statements regarding this, I doubt they would be public if he did. I was not saying it was absolutely malice or evil intent, I was just saying you could not be sure either way. It's hard to imagine a situation where an over the top punishment that produced the results in question was not driven by an emotional response. I don't think that is good parenting and a child that would be defenseless in that situation should not have to endure such.
Not that its really worth arguing or discussing but how do we know that at this time? Ive had similar lacerations to that before (just going off the pics)and they are no longer visible in any form.
Defenseless? When I discipline my daughters its not a fight and they understand as much before it happens.
I am OK with spanking. This seems quite over the top. And the liberal use of spanking is worse than no spanking, imho. And I do not think the removal of the stick from the carrot and stick model has produced today's society, but rather the over use of the carrot. The whole 'self esteem' movement caused a whole generation of kids to grow up believing they were special and could be anything they wanted to be. That life was going to just give them what they wanted because they wanted it. A little stick is fine, but too much stick is bad. A little carrot is fine, but too much carrot is bad.
I don't know how you can say that for sure. given the level of injuries I'd assume exactly the opposite.
I don't understand why we all agree it's never ok to beat a woman or your dog, but for kids it's ok as long as he really didn't mean it. spanking is one thing. this is quite another. "my parents did it to me" really doesn't start making it ok.
Right, but you likely don't inflict such pain as to cause lacerations up and down limbs. At that point, it goes from a kid receiving punishment and understanding the situation to a kid that is completely terrified and can't escape a grown man's physical assault.
Who decides that spanking is okay, slapping a childs hand? Some see that as abuse whether it brings bruises, blood or nothing but hurt feelings.
I don't do any of the above, but I can safely say that anything that leaves bruises or other physical damage after the fact is out of line. pretty hard to do that with an open hand on the fanny.
It is uncomfortable to the extent that it gets the point across. Enough that my 2 are terrified when they have gotten to that point that it is going to happen.
A bright red smart on my ass cheek was all I needed as a kid, but I understand some kids are hard headed and don't respond to light punishment. But defending what happened to that kid is beyond me completely.
So you would take issue with anyone claiming you abuse your child by spanking them even if all it leaves is a hand print for a few seconds. I got the impression that you dont take issue with spankings in general. So correct that if I misread.
Maybe easier to ask it here instead of Ds post. If someone claimed you were abused because your parents left a bright red spot on your butt would you agree or think that was untrue?
the two aren't remotely comparable. One is an adult, entirely independent in her decision making. The other is a child, for whose actions the parent is responsible.
I don't spank my children, but I also don't consider that similar to what AP did. obviously I'm not talking about a little red ass a couple of minutes after the fact. I'm talking legit bruising.
