It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CA Assemblywoman Introduces No Spanking Bill

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   
California assemblywoman Sally Lieber has introduced legislation that would ban any form of spanking on kids less than three years old. That's includes spanking hands, faces or bottoms. Lieber said, "That would include slapping spanking smacking hitting punching, any striking of a child."



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

KSBW News
A Bay Area legislator introduced a bill Thursday that would make it illegal for parents to spank their young children.

Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View, authored the bill, which would make it a misdemeanor for parents to spank a child age 3 years or younger.

……

"This bill is absolutely not big mother government coming in to tell parents what to do," Lieber said. "But it is creating a line in the law that stands on the side of very young children. Children that are 3 years old or younger are really sitting ducks for physical punishment, and they're no match with the speed or size or force of an adult who's beating them."

Opponents said the government shouldn't tell adults how to be parents.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Just when you think things could not get worse with our government officials along comes a dolt like this.

The nerve of this woman, I did a search of her bio and get this she has no kids just a husband and a black and white cat, yet she has the guts to think she knows what is best for parents when it comes to disciplining their kids.

I hope that the bill will not pass and the vast majority of all news coverage is negative towards her stupid proposal.

How do you feel and please be honest? Do you want the government telling you when you can or cannot spank your children?




posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Well, I do have to say that I think hitting a kid especially under 3 is child abuse. Why on earth would we want to hit any child? All that does is perpetuate violence. Reasoning with them is much better and if they're too young to understand, you tell them "no" until they get the message.

There is an excellent book called "For Your Own Good" by Alice Miller, who has spent a lifetime studying the roots of violence in society. She explains beautifully why hitting our kids does nothing except perpetuate violence. Hitting is never a solution IMO. She talks about teaching a kid to learn to make good choices, rather than teaching them to be blindly obedient. And that's done thru giving them choices, not hitting them.

I may get alot of flak for this, but you know, just because a person is a parent doesn't mean they know how best to parent. After all, all they had to teach them about parenting was their own experience and if mom and dad were murderers for instance, well what will they learn about effective parenting? Study alot about effective parenting techniques and then make an informed decision. You may stop the unwanted behavior in the immediate term, but in the long term, think about what you are telling your children which is, in effect, "It's OK to hit people if you think you're right or if you tell them it's for your own good."

Personally, I think this bill is a step in the right direction. Just because someone isn't a parent themselves doesn't mean they don't know how to effectively parent - they may have been teachers or they may be around nieces, nephews, etc. IMO, the most well-adjusted kids are the ones who don't get hit.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:44 PM
link   
I personally think there's a big difference between spanking and hitting and abuse. A tap on the leg or diaper is just going to get their attention, it's not abusive.

I have also observed that most of the bratty children I've seen that do hit and bite people are the ones who's parents tried to reason with them. The ones who were spanked as children didn't grow up to hit others. Again, I'm speaking of spanking and not hitting. There is a difference.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I'm curuious as to what you think the difference is - can you explain? It seems like it's all the same to me and that it would be to the kid as well, being hit is being hit. Personally, the adults I've met who were well-adjusted weren't spanked as kids. There are lots of other ways to deal with a fussy child - time-outs, giving them a choice and well, hell, let them throw a tantrum and not get anything out of it so they will learn what's effective and what's not.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
Well, I do have to say that I think hitting a kid especially under 3 is child abuse. Why on earth would we want to hit any child?


I would tend to agree with you had she not inserted the word slapping into the description which was not mentioned in this article but it was in another.

Source


Speaker Pro Temp Sally Lieber plans to introduce a bill that would ban any form of spanking on kids less than three years old. That's includes spanking hands, faces or bottoms. Lieber said, "That would include slapping spanking smacking hitting punching, any striking of a child."


Oddly enough as this bill is being introduced in CA another which passes on the right to spank children onto tachers in KA is also being proposed.


Bill on Spanking will shield schools

Now that bill is needed far more then one that prohibits spanking since it puts back into schools something that was removed by mistake years ago.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:00 PM
link   
From birth to death the government does not want you to raise your own children. Government schools and attempts to force miscellaneous vaccinations make that abundantly clear. Its only the next logical step that parental discipline be the next thing to fall under the scrutinizing eye of big brother. Soon grounding your child will be interpreted as false imprisonment. Denying your child television or dessert will be seen as methods of brainwashing and nutritional abuse respectively. California seems to like handing over all liberties, freedoms and responsabilities to the government. For that matter so does most of America, if it means theyll get free things in return i.e. healthcare, wage increases, housing allowances, etc...

Its a very sad state we've come to and I see no end in sight. We're on the fast track to a socialist/totalitarian/police state and the momentum increases everyday.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:03 PM
link   
i agree with trekkie. the kids who's parents read dr. spock were the worst behaved. there is a huge difference between spanking and hitting. if you dont teach your children that there are consequences for their actions, they will have to learn it on their own later in life....in ways that you would never want your child to have to learn.

a quick smack on the butt with an open palm lets them know that what they are doing is not going to be accepted. but you should never ever punish your children while you, yourself, are still angry...that is what leads to overstepping the boundary between a spanking and beating.

in regards to the original article, i dont really know what is worse....big brother trying to tell me how to raise my kid, or the fact that as a society we have lowered ourselves to the point that our representatives feel that this kind of bill is necessary....afterall, it is always that one idiot that ruins it for everyone else. why do you think there is a label on hair dryers that says "dont use this product under water?" because some dumbass tried it. same concept here....they are attempting to punish the majority for the sins of the minority.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
I'm curuious as to what you think the difference is - can you explain? It seems like it's all the same to me and that it would be to the kid as well, being hit is being hit. Personally, the adults I've met who were well-adjusted weren't spanked as kids. There are lots of other ways to deal with a fussy child - time-outs, giving them a choice and well, hell, let them throw a tantrum and not get anything out of it so they will learn what's effective and what's not.


you can't see the difference between spanking your child on the bottom and say beating them?

you're right. there are lots of ways to deal with a fussy child. spanking is one of them...this is just one more thing big bro is trying to regualate..

maybe the gov should pass a bill that regulates how long you can keep your kid in 'time out' for



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Physical stimulation is sometimes the only thing that a child understands. Children don't have much reasoning at all. That's why 10 year olds still run out into the middle of the street. They don't have the faculties to understand action/consequence to a level that a teenager, then ultimately an adult has.

Anger and lack of self-control on parents is the problem IMO. I was spanked as a child. Not excessively. But if I continued to do whatever it was I was doing, I got a smack on the butt. Now, because 99.9% of time, my discipline was verbal, and priviledge orientated, all encompassed in healthy dose of love, when I did get spanked, I knew that whatever I was doing, needed to cease.

Because when surrounded with love all the time, a momentary, and occasional not so loving smack on the butt, really grabs one attention to the severity of their actions.

Not to compare children with dogs, but this is the philosophy I use when training my dogs, and it has worked exceptionally. Dogs, like children, want to please their parents. It's inherent.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Someone needs to beat Sally Lieber with a large blunt instrument.
And we wonder why kids nowadays are so disrepectful and unruly?
People like Sally Lieber.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I must say as a single man living in california I found the title of this thread a bit misleading and quite frankly was fairly relieved to see my rights to personal sin not being infringed upon. THough I suppose that says a lot more about me than the OP.

As for spanking kids under three that's a tough one. I was a little shocked at the "punching" language. Who's punching a three year old? That's pretty sick in my opinion.

The only person that should punch a three year old is a two year old.

As for spanking in general, I'm all for it. I don't mean beating your child or smacking him/her one across the jaw.

But sometimes a good spanking gets the point across. I was spanked occasinally as a child (not often mind you) and trust me, I deserved it.

And it really got the point across.

You are not your childs friend and if jimmy needs a spanking a spanking he should get.

Once a child gets older I think spanking, especially in this day and age, just doesn't work.

I would think for a twelve year old it's much more painful to take away their cell phone, computer, xbox, tv, ipod and all the other technical hooha kids have these days.

I believe taking away all of your childs gear and then locking them in their bedroom with a book would really freak a kid out.

IMO of course.

And also not a parent so it's very easy for me to by the arm chair quarter back in this case.

Spiderj



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
Someone needs to beat Sally Lieber with a large blunt instrument.
And we wonder why kids nowadays are so disrepectful and unruly?
People like Sally Lieber.


You are right she should be and there is also another item I left out about her, she also introduced legislation that mandates vaccination of girls for HPV sexually transmitted diseases in the 6th grade. :shk:

Bills would affect new motorists, sixth-grade girls

One legislator is out of hand big time. Oh did I mention they tried to recall her when she was in local government? She got out of the recall by dropping out and running for the state office



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:39 PM
link   
You know what they say- spare the rod, spoil the cat.
This is just another example of trying to strip parents of rights, by those who know what's best for everyone else.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
if you dont teach your children that there are consequences for their actions, they will have to learn it on their own later in life....in ways that you would never want your child to have to learn.


I'm not saying at all "don't teach your kid there are consequences", I'm saying there are better ways to do it.

My stepdaughter, who is mentally retarded, has never been spanked. She is very well-behaved, even in restaurants and always has been even when she was very small. My ex-husband was a wonderful man who never was spanked and he did quite well in life. There are so many other ways to discipline that work better than hitting a kid. Hitting is still hitting, whether it's spanking, slapping or whatever. It has no place in the schools, I would be marching on the White House if they ever touched one hair of my child's head.

America is way too spank-happy - why do you think we have the highest rate of violent crime in the developed world?



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I agree with Spider, nextguyinline, et al who said a good spanking is a necessary and effective disciplinary measure sometimes. Like others, I was spanked when I was being raised, and it was times when I needed it--you don't set your sister's room on fire and get a time out.

It's been a while, but I really couldn't say it was ever harsh beatings--always "attention grabbers," that made you know when you did something wrong, and I'll be damned if I would've understood my parents' attempts to explain why some things are good and some were bad when I was three. Twenty years later I still don't understand half the time, but oh well...

I always considered myself lucky too; I had friends in middle and high school whose parents not only still physically disciplined them, but used foreign objects to do it. (And FWIW, those friends would always admit that they deserved it too, normally with a sheepish grin before proudly displaying their bruise and saying "but man, was it worth it....."). I don't agree in the slightest that a hair brush should be used as a disciplinary tool, but at the same time it'll catch someone's attention. (Same with a shoe, wooden spoon, remote control, etc.--mind you, these were kids who could've easily taken out their parents in an "honest" fight.)

It'll be interesting to see how this bill and the spanking-in-schools bill that shots linked to fare against each other...



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady

America is way too spank-happy - why do you think we have the highest rate of violent crime in the developed world?


if you knew anything about the statistics, you'd realize that we've moved to that position since we stopped allowing paddlings and other meaningful punishments.

IOW, as we become more and more liberal-minded as a country in our methods of punishing children, our crime rates and prison populations go up. but of course, that's just a coincidence i guess.

[edit on 19-1-2007 by snafu7700]



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
America is way too spank-happy - why do you think we have the highest rate of violent crime in the developed world?


I always thought the standard fall back for violence in America was violent movies and video games, not too much discipline. If we could just get that one lawyer who's always hounding the video game industry to follow suit with you, I'll gladly place the blame for my problems on the fact my parents spanked me when I did something wrong. It'd be better than watching them take GTA off the shelf at walmart because some punk shoots up his school. Maybe I could write a book too...


I honestly doubt that any single parenting problem--whether it's discipline (or lack thereof), music, movies, games, etc.--is to blame for how violent we are as a nation. It's probably some combination therein, or it's something entirely unrelated to child rearing, maybe being too lenient on violent criminals or something along those lines.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   
I am the proud parent of two boys and yes, I use spanking as a last resort. As another poster pointed out, children dont often have the reasoning skills to listen to arguements why they souldnt be doing something. I have not had to spank but a couple of times and I dont spank my 2 year old at all, hes just too young. It is a parents right to discipline thier own children the way they see fit as long as they arent abusive.

IMO its not really about the children or spanking, its about getting us used to our rights being infringed upon little by little by the government. Before you know it we dont have any area of our lives that isnt madated by them.



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spiderj
Who's punching a three year old? That's pretty sick in my opinion.


Absolutely. And anyone who would punch, beat or otherwise abuse a baby is not going to respect a law that tells them they can't.

This bill is worthless, and even more, it's the government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong. Again.

Time-outs and consequences are great ways to teach lessons, but a little slap on the wrist or a pop on the diaper gets a kid's attention in the way nothing else does. I don't think it should cause any pain, but just really get their attention. In fact, I'd much rather see a parent pop the child on the diaper than yell at them or threaten them (which I see all the time).



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   
This is rediculous. Parents should have the right to "hit" there kid. There is a time when it is abuse, but the government, in this case, has no right to say what a parent can and can't do. Kids have it to lenient these days, this will only make things worse.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join