blwpyrtv - in reply to your questions:

1. If the girl in the Ohio case felt violated by Freudenthal's actions, you would consider those feelings unreasonable?

'Violated' - how one would feel if someone invaded their home and beat them - Reasonable? Yes! 'Violated' as in having been sexually assaulted - No!

BTW - victim was pulled from bed, put over assailants knee and spanked through her clothes - presumably sleepshirt or similar and bikini underpants (not swimsuit). She laughed. He seemingly blew a fuse, pulled down her pants to inflict greater pain and administered a more vigorous beating. Spontaneous action in presence of witness, not calculated, concealed, manipulative ritualistic act as per your average pervert ...

2. You said you've treated rape victims. Can you clarify in what capacity, or what sort of treatment?

In a medical capacity, as sensitively and gently as possible, with examination, swabbing and other forensic requirements and treatment of physical injuries. I assure you there are degrees of "violation" and things unreportable in the media.

I've also treated brutalised children which is truly soul destroying - where 'trusted' adults have inflicted enormous suffering and often permanent injury. Even greater if that child returns under similar circumstances having been temporarily removed (fostered) then returned to the parent/s.

Do I know the difference between child abuse and reasonable responsible physical correction? I claim Yes.

So if the "Smacking is Child Abuse" Brigade wish to make a difference to REAL violence against children, lobby for permanent removal of children from truly abusive parents with adoption first option and long term fostering second. Meanwhile - good loving parents, give errant kids a smack or slap or 2 around the bum if they ignore your words and don't feel guilty about it. You're doing them and the rest of society a favour.

I don’t know if smacking is harmful in the long term sense, seems to be a lot of research but nothing concrete decided. It’s one of those weird things where you can’t go back in time with a kid and not smack to see what differences there would be in their future.

I don’t think I agree smacking is over quickly but kids do forgive their parents all sorts of stuff. I remember being smacked and still resent the hell out of it. And the smacks that happen later were the worst of all whereas I understood mum or dad losing it I didn’t understand them doing it in a cold and calculated way or at an appointed time.

Paul:“I don't smack because I'm angry and I don't see it as a failure in any way. Those people who do are entitled to their opinion, what I really object to is the idea that their opinion holds more weight than mine when it comes to MY kids.”

I think your opinion is valid and they are your children so I support your right to chose how to discipline them - and I don’t put smacking in the abuse basket.

Now your turn – say you support my right to parent the way I choose as long as it is effective and non-abusive. :)

Divine:”…wish to make a difference to REAL violence against children, lobby for permanent removal of children from truly abusive parents with adoption first option and long term fostering second.”

Nope. Maybe. Sometimes. Yes. Never.

We so need another thread. Where is Jeremy Sammut these days?

Jewely,

No question. I agree that parents are generally the best judge of what is best for their own child. I wouldn’t presume to dictate to you how you brought up your child. But of course this is exactly what the anti-smacking crowd want to do to me. Its absurd and extremely moralistic, from a bunch who couldn’t imagine they were acting exactly like the bible bashers they resent. Except these bunch do it in the name of social sciences. A more self righteous bunch of anal retentive, you couldn’t expect to meet. Except of course on Sunday morning at the local reactionary church

I struggle to understand how you could resent your parents for being smacked, unless you'd done absolutely nothing to deserve it. In my mind, if I knew I'd done something really bad, I knew what was likely to happen. My parents were not particularly harsh but they were very fair and very predictable. I've never felt that they didn't have the right to enforce discipline in their own house, and so I could not understand feeling that they had no right. It just doesn't make sense to me. Unless, perhaps, smacking was totally foreign in your house, or it was a step-parent.

I take exactly the opposite view to you. I don't agree that its easier to understand parents who smack because they've lost their temper. I think its far more reasonable to smack because children have crossed a line that requires it. I think children need boundaries so that they know which lines they can bend, and which they can't. When its only done because someone's lost their temper there is an inherent uncertainty involved, which leads the child to worry more about upsetting you, than doing the right thing. Which totally defeats the point. Unless the point is ‘don’t upset me’, which it obviously shouldn't be.

I didn’t know there was some anti-smacking group out there bullying smackers into their way of thinking – I will avoid them like the plague.

I resented being hit, I don’t look back and think it was fair or okay whether I deserved it or not. It’s forgiven is all. I’d worry about a kid who passively accepted a smacking. In fact if they do hasn’t it just ceased to be effective?

I don’t know how to explain it but as teens become adults I want them to do the right thing because it is the right thing and not because the alternative is being punished. I don’t want children being sneakier or lying about being naughty because if they do something wrong and the consequences are always painful. A lot of kids when you talk to them can’t believe what they’ve done – some impulse took over or brain malfunctioned and they regret it already. I don’t want naughty things forgiven instantly though but a smack doesn’t often lead to much understanding of what caused the behavior even if it can stop it in a heartbeat.

Sorry I’m not very clear eh. I need to go on some kind of writing course.

An angry, stressed, tired parent delivering a slap seems pretty everyday and forgivable. But say a tanty at a friends house means you put them in the car, drive them home, deliver a smack. Weird. A small child wouldn’t get it and an older child would be getting punished in the moment they have calmed down. I’ll have to ask Yabby but I think that causes a problem with emotional connections and memories later.

PaulL,

>>"According to your logic, smacking your own child leaves them vulnerable to assault by others who may use this act as cover for their predatory behaviour. Do you think we should stop bathing our children naked, because it leaves them vulnerable to perverts who might want to do the same. Should we not cuddle and kiss them, since that also leaves them vulnerable to people who might use such love for affection as cover to abuse them?"<<

No, because unlike spanking, bathing is clearly imperative to children's health. To *not* bathe a child incapable of bathing itself would be criminal neglect.

To deprive a child of physical affection such as cuddling or kisses would be inherently cruel. Depriving them of spanking, not so much.

Besides, spanking has much stronger associations with pornography than hugging or kissing, as well a dynamic of intimidation that can work in an abuser's favor. Notice how DiPalma threatened his victim with a harder spanking if he told anyone about the first.

This discussion reminds me of the aphorism "all generalizations are false. Including this one."

The entire smack/no-smack argument must, surely, remain a personal one.

Unless the smacking tips over into assault (and I still worry about the guy "pulling down a 14-year-old girl's pants and spanking her hard enough to cause bruises"), it is irrelevant to anyone except the parties concerned. The government has established guidelines for a court to determine whether an assault has taken place, surely that is as far as they need to go.

And as for one parent saying to another "you shouldn't smack", or the other retorting "you need to smack", the discussion is equally pointless. Neither has the requisite understanding of the relationship involved necessary to form such a blanket judgment, one way or another.

Mine is a personal view that, had I succumbed to the temptation of giving them a whack, I would have a) lost the argument and b) set a bad example.

But that's just my view, and no amount of "spare the rod" exhortation will change that.