• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Public Schools and The New Child Abuse

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Public Schools and The New Child Abuse

You will notice that anti public school types blame the public schools for lack of discipline! That's exactly the point, discipline used to be the responsibility of the parent! Now discipline is the school's problem! I've never met a parent that didn't pay "lip service" to discipline in the schools, at least until it came to their little darling! Then excuses for little Johnny begin!

Last night in a nice restaurant, I watched a very nice looking, well dressed young family try to eat while their child screamed any time something displeased him. He simply turned his head away rudely if he didn't want to be fed and swiped his hand at the spoon. He struck his parents repeatedly on the arms when he was angry and life was not as he wanted! They just acted like everything was right in the world! After all he's a child! In about 2 1/2 years he will be in a school and some poor teacher will be asked why there isn't more discipline in her classroom!

Children didn't act like that years ago! In my generation, we didn't even think about it! Our parents realized we were just little people, not adorable pure, innocent, perfect angels of God to be worshiped by parents and grand parents as today! As a child you were taught is was only appropriate to cry when sick, hurt, or frightened, but not out of anger, spoiled rage and as a tool of emotional blackmail. You behaved in restaurants to respect other people's rights, or you were taken outside for an attitude adjustment. When you misbehaved, you got the "Family Look" from a parent and you knew it meant "Behave properly or suffer consequences!" You behaved! Child abuse you sayd! Absolute baloney! It was called parenting in those days! Child abuse is treating our children like spoiled little kings and queens to be worshiped and then sending them out into society to find out the rest of the world won't put up with their self centered, spoiled little tantrums as adults! Their future husbands and wives will divorce them as self centered overgrown children dressing and acting like they are 12 in 28 year old bodies! Look around you at the "I don't want to grow up generation!" Don't we all see men in their middle twenties and even older with heavy beards acting and dressing like they are in middle school trying live as self centered children with their toys! Many of them creating babies to be raised by children like themselves!

Children are not born sweet, innocent little angels! Watch them in a playground! They are born with totally self centered needs and attitudes. They will become adults with totally spoiled, self center needs and attitudes if parents don't teach them to be aware of other people's needs and how to be courteous and civil. We are creating an "It's all about me!" generation where more is never enough, and nice cars and homes should just be there for me without all this hard, boring work and saving! After all other people have them, where's mine!

Public schools aren't perfect, but they never have been! What's really changed is parenting! Go to a restaurant or mall, you'll see it! Children not receiving the loving discipline they need! It's the new child abuse! We want our public schools to fix it! :roll:
 
Last edited:

liberal1

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Not much of an optimist, saying that people are born inherantly evil, but that's fine. But I think that an adequate parent should not have to hit their child or threaten them with this "Family Look." An occasional whack on the head once in a while is alright, but to use pain as a way to resolve problems, what's that doing? Teaching them that violence should be used when you're dissapointed or frustrated? I know I am probably some irreverant self- centered punk to you, but to rely on violence for installing morals and values is not something I am for.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm glad my parents never hit me.


Otherwise I probably wouldn't have the self confidence I have. I can know respectively disagree with people without thinking in the back of my mind I'll get socked in the face for it.



Proper parenting is a tough job though...
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Boy talk about an example of the "Slippery Slope" fallacy of logic! I'm a moderate liberal but this kind of overboard silly liberalism is what gives liberals a bad name!

First, to recognize two year old children are too young to understand the needs of others and are therefore naturally and biologically selfish in trying to meet their own needs is not to believe in original sin or that children are born evil! Geez, how silly! What a stretch!

Secondly, no one suggested beating children, but rather disciplining them rather than letting the become spoiled, angry, unhappy brats that are taught the world revolves around them. As far as mild corporal punishment done "not out of anger or emotion" but out of love and concern, the jury is still out on that! I maintain that there is a difference in a mild smack on the rump for a child who insists on try to run into traffic and child abuse! What causes damage to children is not a smack on the hand or rump, but being hit in anger! You underestimate children when you assume they don't know the difference! Discipline should be age appropriate! Very mild corporal punishment (never done in anger) maybe appropriate for small children where it is inappropriate for older children who can be reasoned with. Many parents abuse their children without smacking them by socially acceptable methods like guilt trips involving religion and pyschological pressure!

I'm so lucky my parents had the good sense and love to smack me on the seat when I was too young to understand the pyscho-edu-babble that is letting children misbehave and creating the culture we have today!

I still maintain the worse child abuse is not disciplining children because they are so precious! Look at the children you see everyday in stores and restuarants that don't care about anything but their own spoiled, selfish needs and tell me we aren't missing something! Some of those children are unmarried, 28 years old with children of their own! The schools are expected to bring some discipline into their lives! I wish I had a dollar for every child I had to tell not to be rude to their parent in front of me, their teacher! Then the modern parent would say, "Oh! It's all right!" and I'd have to answer back, "No, I'm sorry but it's not all right here at school to behave that way to parents!"

Even a mother bear who will die to protect her cubs has the instinct to nip them on the rump when they choose to run towards danger. We need to hold on to some common sense! :2wave:
 
Last edited:

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Wait, so a two-and-a-half year old baby having a tantrum is undisciplined? Wtf?
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
vergiss said:
Wait, so a two-and-a-half year old baby having a tantrum is undisciplined? Wtf?
Absolutely! It's not evil, just normally, humanly undisciplined. What do you think the purpose of a tantrum is? You underestimate children! When would you start teaching kids that good behavior gets rewarded and bad behavior does not? Maybe 13 years old when you have a selfish brat flipping you off?

Discipline is not about punishment. It's about teaching kids good behavior gets rewarded and bad behavior does not in an age appropriate way. At two years old it may be just ignoring and not rewarding the tantrum, and at 13 it might be sitting and discussing the issue. Basic biology: Organisms only repeat behavior that works. Many parents reward bad behavior by randomly giving into to it. Kids find out that the main factor that controls the chance they will be rewarded for their bad behavior is the strength of their demand/nagging/tantrum. When we give into to it "some" of the time that's what we teach them. When bad behavior is never rewarded only an idiot would keep trying the same behavior. You try a different approach, maybe even good behavior.

Being a parent that provides consistent, age appropriate discipline is one of the hardest things to do in a human relationship! Nobody gets it all right!
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm on my third walk through the 2 1/2 yr old stint....and guess what....they cry. My 4 and 6 yrs olds are very well behaved, and homeschooled....but guess what....they cried at 2 1/2 as well. We have NEVER hit our kids....as it is not something we believe in, but our children are well disciplined to the point where they will communicate issues with mom and dad. Yes....they still cry...dont we all. But they talk and think as well.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I am father of 2 and grandfather of 6, and Uncle to a LOT more.
Sounds to me like the child was trying to get attention and has developed this method for getting it. Perhaps mommy and daddy should spend more time with their child so he doesn't feel so insecure.
Not all children are the same. Some need very little discipline, perhaps raising your voice would be enough to correct them. Others need a bit more. At certain ages, they are too young to talk to, as they don't understand. Some of those get to be slapped on the thigh (no sense trying to spank thru a diaper) to get their attention. I have done that only a few times over the years, and usually it is to stop them from doing something that may cause them to get hurt. In one case, the child was chewing on a lamp cord.
How do you "discuss" the dangers of that with a little floor crawler?

People who say we should NEVER spank are living in a dream world. Some kids will need it, at least a little.
There are no absolutes in this world that I know of, especially with children.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Mr. D said:
Boy talk about an example of the "Slippery Slope" fallacy of logic! I'm a moderate liberal but this kind of overboard silly liberalism is what gives liberals a bad name!

First, to recognize two year old children are too young to understand the needs of others and are therefore naturally and biologically selfish in trying to meet their own needs is not to believe in original sin or that children are born evil! Geez, how silly! What a stretch!

Secondly, no one suggested beating children, but rather disciplining them rather than letting the become spoiled, angry, unhappy brats that are taught the world revolves around them. As far as mild corporal punishment done "not out of anger or emotion" but out of love and concern, the jury is still out on that! I maintain that there is a difference in a mild smack on the rump for a child who insists on try to run into traffic and child abuse! What causes damage to children is not a smack on the hand or rump, but being hit in anger! You underestimate children when you assume they don't know the difference! Discipline should be age appropriate! Very mild corporal punishment (never done in anger) maybe appropriate for small children where it is inappropriate for older children who can be reasoned with. Many parents abuse their children without smacking them by socially acceptable methods like guilt trips involving religion and pyschological pressure!

I'm so lucky my parents had the good sense and love to smack me on the seat when I was too young to understand the pyscho-edu-babble that is letting children misbehave and creating the culture we have today!

I still maintain the worse child abuse is not disciplining children because they are so precious! Look at the children you see everyday in stores and restuarants that don't care about anything but their own spoiled, selfish needs and tell me we aren't missing something! Some of those children are unmarried, 28 years old with children of their own! The schools are expected to bring some discipline into their lives! I wish I had a dollar for every child I had to tell not to be rude to their parent in front of me, their teacher! Then the modern parent would say, "Oh! It's all right!" and I'd have to answer back, "No, I'm sorry but it's not all right here at school to behave that way to parents!"

Even a mother bear who will die to protect her cubs has the instinct to nip them on the rump when they choose to run towards danger. We need to hold on to some common sense! :2wave:

My parents never smacked me. It installs fear, I know it does. There is no such thing as "good fear" either.
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Now I dont see anything wrong with a parent using corporal punishment so long as the line doesnt get crossed and become abusive. I grew up in a household where I knew full well the consequences of bad behavior were going to be taking your licks when Da' found out. I was mostly grounded for bad behavior but the line was very clear as to what was going to get you a whipping. Whippings were no more than three licks with a paddle kept for just such reasons. I am perfectly well adjusted, responsible, and respectful. I feel no slight by my parents in my up-bringing and I have admiration for the way they raised us kids. In fact, I will follow their example with my own kids. One thing is for certain...when we all went out to a restaurant, there was no misbehaving and we were complimented on our manners. I wish parents today were as committed to teaching their kids respect.

Mr. D, I agree with you 100 percent!!!
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
tecoyah said:
I'm on my third walk through the 2 1/2 yr old stint....and guess what....they cry. My 4 and 6 yrs olds are very well behaved, and homeschooled....but guess what....they cried at 2 1/2 as well. We have NEVER hit our kids....as it is not something we believe in, but our children are well disciplined to the point where they will communicate issues with mom and dad. Yes....they still cry...dont we all. But they talk and think as well.
Did you get the impression I was expecting children not to cry or be children? Did you get the impression I think discipline is the same as beating children in anger? If you did, I didn't make my point well! Crying isn't throwing tantrums and hitting your parents or other children while modern parents standby allowing them to express their darling their inner child at the expense fo the rest of the world! We live in a world were many kids and adults have no consideration for anyone's needs but their own! It starts at 2 1/2!

The only point that I can understand many parents and educators disagreeing with me on because it's not in vogue, is that from my own observations and dealing with children for 31 years, I don't believe that all mild corporal punishment without anger is "automatically" child abuse and has a harmful affect on children. That theory sounds very pat, educated, and easy, but it doesn't seem to relate to the real world. If it did the generation that won WW II would have all been damaged and put in prison! Being 64, I certainly would have been pyschologically destroyed too, because thankfully my parents didn't buy into that baloney!

Many children never need a little swat on the diaper, but some children will attempt dangerous behaviors where the risk is just too great to use verbal counseling. My grandson would repeatedly run away from adults laughing in any direction without looking, or touch anything he was warned not to touch! Of course the easy, modern answer is to never let him near anything dangerous! Be a perfect parent. The problem is that his life and safety are riding on the perfection of applying perfection in parenting. When I was a small child I was taught not to run into traffic or touch dangerous objects not because I clearly understood the danger, but because I knew my little butt would get a swat if I disobeyed my parents. How horrible? I assume you think my grandson will become a serial killer as I did (not really) because of a swat on the rump! Frankly, I'm more concerned with him being hit by a car or having a hand cut off because I couldn't make him understand the real danger of his decisions at 2 1/2 and he slipped out of my hand!

Again discipline should never be done out of control and in anger which is what really damages children rather than the swat! It also should be age appropriate! If you are teaching psychology and social ethics to a two year old and beating a 10 year old, you don't get good disciplining!

If you think we are doing such a good job with modern pyscho-edu-babble discipline you must live in a different country than I do! It explains why we cannot fix education by "disciplining" our teachers and not our precious students!

OK! I'm done! You buy it, or you don't!
 
Last edited:

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
tecoyah said:
I'm on my third walk through the 2 1/2 yr old stint....and guess what....they cry. My 4 and 6 yrs olds are very well behaved, and homeschooled....but guess what....they cried at 2 1/2 as well. We have NEVER hit our kids....as it is not something we believe in, but our children are well disciplined to the point where they will communicate issues with mom and dad. Yes....they still cry...dont we all. But they talk and think as well.
Good for you, hope you get a medal for being lucky with your kids. Your little sample is not enough to infer anything for research purposes. The homeschool part is a concern, tho. Hope you have what it takes to do it right, as most do not. You occasionally read about a home schooled child entering college at 14 smarter than most 24 year olds, but what is most likely to happen is that they grow up so isolated from the real world that they think inside a bubble their entire lives, believing things like all hitting is wrong and any punishment of a physical nature will damage their little minds forever.
I think God built us a bit stronger than that.
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
After all the politically correctness is over, the bottomline is that many who home school are really about indoctrination. They want to make sure their children only see the world through their parent eyes. They want to filter out the world and anything that might cause their childen to see the world differently. Unfortunately while parents pass on their good values they also pass on their prejudices and skewed views of the world. They see that as a good thing when they do it, but a terrible thing when it's done by the Taliban.

I didn't want my children to think just like me, I wanted them to be better than me as they moved into a new world! Home schooling doesn't encourage "true" questioning any more than Sunday school. Many home schooled kids have all the pre programmed answers at a very young age! You can hear their parents pre recorded beliefs coming out of their little mouths. Parents, you can't keep out the world with home schooling!

I know home schoolers, I'm wrong! You just love your kids more than the rest of us!
 
Last edited:

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Parents who do not set and enforce boundaries for their children are doing their children no good service nor are they instilling self confidence in their children. I believe most children not only want boundaries but are terrified when there are none. A swat or two on the rear can be cathartic and clear the air for a young child--he knows he's behaved abysmally and once he has received an appropriate punishment he has a brand new do over. Schools should not be the ones to teach discipline to children, but they definitely should enforce it with the full support of the parent. When I was a child it would be unheard of for a parent to take the child's side against a teacher unless it was one really bad teacher. And to throw a temper fit in public once the kid was big enough to throw a fit on purpose would be grounds for losing a lot of privileges even after the spanking. It just wasn't done. And you know what? You didn't have half the kids on Ritalin or some other behavior modifying drugs back then either, and the classroom wasn't pandemonium and people took their kids to restaurants without disrupting everybody's meal.

I do not in any way support harming children in any way, physically, mentally, or spiritually. But I disagree that there is no such thing as a 'good fear'. To fear consequences for bad actions is a good thing no matter what age you are.
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
AlbqOwl said:
Parents who do not set and enforce boundaries for their children are doing their children no good service nor are they instilling self confidence in their children. I believe most children not only want boundaries but are terrified when there are none. A swat or two on the rear can be cathartic and clear the air for a young child--he knows he's behaved abysmally and once he has received an appropriate punishment he has a brand new do over. Schools should not be the ones to teach discipline to children, but they definitely should enforce it with the full support of the parent. When I was a child it would be unheard of for a parent to take the child's side against a teacher unless it was one really bad teacher. And to throw a temper fit in public once the kid was big enough to throw a fit on purpose would be grounds for losing a lot of privileges even after the spanking. It just wasn't done. And you know what? You didn't have half the kids on Ritalin or some other behavior modifying drugs back then either, and the classroom wasn't pandemonium and people took their kids to restaurants without disrupting everybody's meal.

I do not in any way support harming children in any way, physically, mentally, or spiritually. But I disagree that there is no such thing as a 'good fear'. To fear consequences for bad actions is a good thing no matter what age you are.
Well, too, I believe there is a big difference between respect and fear. I did not fear my father, but I respected the man with every fiber of my being. I still do to this day. I respect my mother too. They were the coolest parents anyone could have grown up with...they were young and they were smart and they were very open-minded. However, we kids knew what the boundaries were and we knew full well what the penalties for crossing those boundaries were. Did we like all the boundaries? Hell no. Did we like the penalties for crossing the boundaries? Of course not. Did we cross the boundaries more than once? Definitely not.

I think it is also important to note...boundaries should be strictly and tightly defined from the start...and as the child progresses in maturity, the boundaries should be lessened and expanded...gives the child something to look forward to and a built in reward system. I think also gradual laxing of boundaries curbs what I call the "buck wild syndrome." You all had a friend who did it...parents were too strict at home so as soon as they got out from under their thumb, they went buck wild and ruined their life.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Agreed on appropriately expanding boundaries as the kids get older. I, however, like to think that I raised my two kids the same and we did expand the boundaries as appropriately as we knew how. One of those two kids was steady as a rock from the beginning of his being a young adult. The other went hog wild. (She has her PhD now and a very excellent job and is doing just fine.)

Same with my sister's five. Four never went nuts. One did. (He's a cattle rancher now and probably a gazillionaire so he turned out okay in the end too.)

But I do believe you had great parents, Jallman. It might even show, actually. And apparently they were your parents and not your buddies. That's another component of this. Kids have enough friends and they need parents more than two more friends though there is much to be said for the parents spending quality and quantity time with their kids. It also helps a lot, I think, if those parents stay together and raise their kids.

I think a whole lot of the problems we see with kids today is a result of bad parenting and the lack of teamwork between the parents and the schools. Then again, you still find an awful lot of really good kids, and we all know when people turn out great despite really bad parents and some kids are rotten no matter how great their parents were.

In the end, its pretty much up to us to be who we want to be.
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
AlbqOwl said:
Parents who do not set and enforce boundaries for their children are doing their children no good service nor are they instilling self confidence in their children. I believe most children not only want boundaries but are terrified when there are none. A swat or two on the rear can be cathartic and clear the air for a young child--he knows he's behaved abysmally and once he has received an appropriate punishment he has a brand new do over. . . . . . And you know what? You didn't have half the kids on Ritalin or some other behavior modifying drugs back then either, and the classroom wasn't pandemonium and people took their kids to restaurants without disrupting everybody's meal.

I do not in any way support harming children in any way, physically, mentally, or spiritually. But I disagree that there is no such thing as a 'good fear'. To fear consequences for bad actions is a good thing no matter what age you are.
Well put AlbqOwl!
 

paulmarkj

Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
106
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
AlbqOwl said:
Parents who do not set and enforce boundaries for their children are doing their children no good service nor are they instilling self confidence in their children. I believe most children not only want boundaries but are terrified when there are none. A swat or two on the rear can be cathartic and clear the air for a young child--he knows he's behaved abysmally and once he has received an appropriate punishment he has a brand new do over. Schools should not be the ones to teach discipline to children, but they definitely should enforce it with the full support of the parent. When I was a child it would be unheard of for a parent to take the child's side against a teacher unless it was one really bad teacher. And to throw a temper fit in public once the kid was big enough to throw a fit on purpose would be grounds for losing a lot of privileges even after the spanking. It just wasn't done. And you know what? You didn't have half the kids on Ritalin or some other behavior modifying drugs back then either, and the classroom wasn't pandemonium and people took their kids to restaurants without disrupting everybody's meal.

I do not in any way support harming children in any way, physically, mentally, or spiritually. But I disagree that there is no such thing as a 'good fear'. To fear consequences for bad actions is a good thing no matter what age you are.
I think you are useing 'fear' in a different context.

Bad fear: To fear a parent: to be afraid. To be afraid to make a mistake. To not always know what you are afraid of.

That is the dictionary definiton
1. A feeling of agitation and anxiety caused by the presence or imminence of danger.
2. A state or condition marked by this feeling: living in fear.

To fear consequences is something different: to understand that one action creates consequences; that to understand we have responsibilities.

The latter is not so much fear as understanding. Dictionary definition:
# To consider probable; expect: I fear you are wrong. I fear I have bad news for you.

I was never punished physically as a child, niether have I hit my children. It is possible. That, of course, is not a scientific or statistical proof, but waht would be interesting is to study a group of badly behaved individuals (perhaps prisoners) and find out how they were treated as children.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
paulmarkj I was never punished physically as a child said:
I doubt that would be a meaningful study. There are far more ill treated persons outside of prison than inside, they just didn't let the abuse get to them. And we are not talking abuse here, or beating, but at the worst, a spanking. Lots of people think they are all one and the same. They are not. My mother hit a lot, but she was too small to really hurt me plhysically, she was very good at emotional abuse, tho. But my dad used a heavy leather strap and he hit while he was angry. I was the favorite target of both of them. I have committed no crimes worthy of prison, and am relatively well adjusted husband, father, and grandfather. I used to hate my parents, but got to the point of just having pity for them and their misquided ways. My younger brother, however, was spoiled, never punished (no matter what) , and became a worthless person, altho he also never went to prison. Got hauled to jail a few times, tho, just got released after paying his fines.
He was mom's last baby and she ruined him with her love far more than she ruined me with her hate. Long run, it is up to us to get over it and move on.
 

AlbqOwl

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
22,769
Reaction score
11,834
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
UtahBill said:
I doubt that would be a meaningful study. There are far more ill treated persons outside of prison than inside, they just didn't let the abuse get to them. And we are not talking abuse here, or beating, but at the worst, a spanking. Lots of people think they are all one and the same. They are not. My mother hit a lot, but she was too small to really hurt me plhysically, she was very good at emotional abuse, tho. But my dad used a heavy leather strap and he hit while he was angry. I was the favorite target of both of them. I have committed no crimes worthy of prison, and am relatively well adjusted husband, father, and grandfather. I used to hate my parents, but got to the point of just having pity for them and their misquided ways. My younger brother, however, was spoiled, never punished (no matter what) , and became a worthless person, altho he also never went to prison. Got hauled to jail a few times, tho, just got released after paying his fines.
He was mom's last baby and she ruined him with her love far more than she ruined me with her hate. Long run, it is up to us to get over it and move on.
Thank you UtahBill. Your childhood sounds much like mine. I grew up with an alcoholic mother and emotionallyand physically abusive father, and it would be easy to use that as a crutch for any weaknesses, shortcomings, failures, or inappropriate behaviors now. But as you so eloquently pointed out, the responsibility for the choices we make is ultimately up to us, and we cannot blame others for the choices we make. We all know people who had great parents and turned out rotten and we all know people who had miserable childhoods who turned out great. On average, the best of all worlds for any child, however, is to have both parents in the home, for them to love him/her, and for them to love each other.

Short of abuse, I think the method of discipline employed is less important than that it be fair, consistent, equitably applied, and certain. Parents should be able to back up the teacher and the teacher should be able to back up the parent in insisting that the child be a little citizen and not a little monster. It should be the adults in authority and not the child that decides when and what the child eats, how the child dresses, and what privileges the child shall have. And sufficient discipline should be employed at both home and school to provide a learning environment and real education should be happening.

Unfortunately, too many parents are having to find a way to pay private school tuition or home school to accomplish that. It shouldn't be that way.
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
AlbqOWL & Utah Bill,

Let's start a club! Lot's of us didn't come from perfect homes! You just do your best to get over it and move on!

After 31 years of teaching I'm convinced there are no easy, simple answers and none of us really understand clearly why one one person is able to master some self discipline and decison making while another cannot, often even within the same family. I believe many criminals and social misfits lack something they have no control over. It's not always an active decision to be bad or have no control. I think there are many more developmentally disabled people who just can make it in a complex society than we admit. It's easier to call them criminals. I have one in my family. It's not always a matter of I.Q. always, but inability to sequence events and see the world as others do. It some people decision making and self control does not seem pass childhood levels. A hundred years ago on a family farm he would have done fine.

It's a sin that our country does not provide programs for those who cannot cope in society where they can do supervised work to earn meals, a place to live, medical care and pocket change. During the depression the WPA did that! Sure it would cost money, but having them on the street and in prisons costs allot more and it's inhumane! We claim to be a compassionate country, but we seem to only provide punishment to those who can't cope with life! Most of our men who are unemployable because of some mental/developmental problem will wind up in prison because of desperation. We save money by not helping them with work programs and then spend much, much more money putting them in prison!

Our educational and prison approaches are penny wise and pound (dollar) foolish! It costs allot less to educate people than lock them up! Our school systems don't lead directly to employment at graduation because we are too cheap to have state of the art vocational training with employers waiting for graduates with jobs. We'd rather build more prisons!
 
Last edited:

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Mr. D said:
AlbqOWL & Utah Bill,

Let's start a club! Lot's of us didn't come from perfect homes! You just do your best to get over it and move on!

After 31 years of teaching I'm convinced there are no easy, simple answers and none of us really understand clearly why one one person is able to master some self discipline and decison making while another cannot, often even within the same family. I believe many criminals and social misfits lack something they have no control over. It's not always an active decision to be bad or have no control. I think there are many more developmentally disabled people who just can make it in a complex society than we admit. It's easier to call tehm criminals. I have one in my family. It's not a matter of I.Q. always, but inability to sequence events and see the world as others do. It some people decision making and self control does not seem pass childhood levels. A hundred years ago on a family farm he would have done fine.

It's a sin that our country does not provide programs for those who cannot cope in society where they can do supervised work to earn meals, a place to live, medical care and pocket change. Durding the depdression sthe WPA id that! Sure it would cost money, but having them on the street and in prisons costs allot more and it's inhumane! We claim to be a compassionate country, but talk we seem to only provide punishment to those who can't cope with life!
A club where we get sympathy from each other, perhaps? No thanks, I prefer to look ahead, not back.
People have to WANT to enter the programs you speak of, and most don't want to do any such thing. Compassion only works on those who seek to change their lives. My oldest sister, fairly well off, offered help to our youngest brother, but it involved him moving out of his shack, giving up his dogs, moving in with her, and getting a welding job that she knew of and that he was qualified for. He would not give up his dogs, and she wasn't having them at her house. So, he chose his to sustain his current condition
rather than move upward and onward with his life. That is the way people are. They can't get past their current conditions if it requires even a small amount of effort or sacrifice on their part.
In my brother's case, he never had to answer for any of his bad deeds, and it is a small miracle that he didn't end up in prison. I suppose he just wasn't aggressive enough to be more than worthless.:(
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
UtahBill,

Tell me about it! I've got a son in prison! He's has normal intelligence but was born developmentally disabled with the maturity of a 10 year old at 27.

You are absolutely correct, but there still should be help for those who would take it. I believe my son would love have a place to go that would give him a supervised life of service in a community. He tried to make it in the military, but was discharged after 3 months for asthma. If that hadn't happened I think he would have made it in the military. That final defeat broke his spirit and he gave up on himself! Now his options are limited due to going to prison. It's the greatest pain in my life for 27 years! I suspect only death will get me relief from it! If there is a God, I have some problems with him! :roll:
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Mr. D said:
UtahBill,

Tell me about it! I've got a son in prison! He's has normal intelligence but was born developmentally disabled with the maturity of a 10 year old at 27.

You are absolutely correct, but there still should be help for those who would take it. I believe my son would love have a place to go that would give him a supervised life of service in a community. He tried to make it in the military, but was discharged after 3 months for asthma. If that hadn't happened I think he would have made it in the military. That final defeat broke his spirit and he gave up on himself! Now his options are limited due to going to prison. It's the greatest pain in my life for 27 years! I suspect only death will get me relief from it! If there is a God, I have some problems with him! :roll:
It has always been my opinion that the military should make room for mildly disabled persons. If they can function even marginally in civilian life, why not allow them to serve? So he can't run a mile while carrying a rifle and backpack, so what? Not everyone fights!
There are many jobs in the military that can be performed without being perfect physical and mental specimens. I met one mildly retarded person while in the navy who had no family to go home to after 20 years of service, and they were going to force him out, but a doctor said he had to stay in until his "nervous condition" was cured. He wasn't the smartest guy around, but he ran the ships laundry and store as well as anybody. I don't know how long he and the doctor got away with it, but surely it helped him by delaying the seperation process.
 

Mr. D

Active member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
UtahBill said:
It has always been my opinion that the military should make room for mildly disabled persons. If they can function even marginally in civilian life, why not allow them to serve? So he can't run a mile while carrying a rifle and backpack, so what? Not everyone fights!
There are many jobs in the military that can be performed without being perfect physical and mental specimens. I met one mildly retarded person while in the navy who had no family to go home to after 20 years of service, and they were going to force him out, but a doctor said he had to stay in until his "nervous condition" was cured. He wasn't the smartest guy around, but he ran the ships laundry and store as well as anybody. I don't know how long he and the doctor got away with it, but surely it helped him by delaying the seperation process.
I agree 100%! It would be much better for society to create a place for those who can't cope in society then to watch them wind up in prison at a substantial cost to the taxpayer and a loss of a human spirit. I know in my heart the difference between my son being in prison or in the military was his inability to run a required time around a track! His commander wanted to keep him, but the doctors wouldn't allow it. Our society isn't as compassionate as it likes to believe.
 
Top Bottom