Legislation that Gov. JB Pritzker signed into law this month bans physical punishment in private schools while reiterating a prohibition on the practice in public schools implemented 30 years ago.
Earlier that day, the child allegedly spit at a teacher. Now, he was in handcuffs and a police officer was saying he could end up in jail.
Well…that’s assault…what would you like the teacher to do in that situation?
Once upon a time, back in the dark ages when I was in school, kids like that were sent to the principal’s office, at which point they might be given detention, suspension, or even expulsion.
Hell when I was a kid having meltdowns it usually took me chucking a chair for the police to be called. Me spitting while only partially melting down was usually seen as a throw him at the principal problem.
We can’t expel children any more. And I’m betting this was the last straw after several detentions.
What would you like the teacher to do then?
Why can’t “we” expel children anymore? You can here in Indiana.
I guess you can expell children in my state, but the paperwork and procedure makes it almost impossible. The teacher would have to go through the equivalent of a small trial…and that’s only if it’s a normal kid. If a parent says ADHD the kid can’t be expelled.
It’s fucking weird to arrest kids, I get that. But as someone with a kid in school, I’ve seen how batshit crazy school has gotten.
If I had spit on a teacher growing up, I’d immediately have been expelled and thrown in juvie. Welcome to alternative education.
I believe the teachers. They’re under paid and dealing with the craziest fucked up post COVID generation in history.
If I had spit on a teacher growing up, I’d immediately have been expelled and thrown in juvie.
Where on Earth did you grow up that spitting on a teacher would have ended with you being thrown in juvenile detention? Can you provide any evidence of this?
Rural America.
Not to arrest children.
Wipe it off, tell the child in no uncertain terms that this is never acceptable, and if it continues being confrontational to that degree, send it to the principal’s office to get detention.
And after that doesn’t work several times?
You’re talking as if there weren’t pedagogic professionals who have solved this problem. If a child is that unwilling to conform even slightly, the child either has special needs and doesn’t belong there, or, more likely, there’s shit going down at the child’s home and CPS need to get involved.
I’m thoroughly baffled that you think there’s any kind of argument to be made for corporeal punishment. The scientific world has solved and moved on a century ago. The backwater sticklers who still don’t get it are harmful Luddites, not people with opinions to take seriously.
I’m absolutely not for corporeal punishment. I am ok with a kid being arrested.for assault.
Take it or leave it, but there are some children that just shouldn’t be in the public school system for whatever reason.
I absolutely am for better mental health resources and special needs programs. Being tolerant of neurodivergent children is great, I’m all for it, until they are violent or make teaching the other kids impossible.
Then…I don’t know…arresting the kid seems reasonable if they been repeatedly violent and disruptive.
Teachers have their hands tied when dealing with violent children. I don’t know what the answer is.
It’s CHILD ABUSE!
To not allow TEACHERS to SPANK KIDS! I’m a Republican trying to Protect The Children!
The thumbnail made me think this was about hitting children with busses, glad to see that’s already illegal
I thought it was going to be a !fuck_cars@lemmy.ml post, until I reached the corporeal punishment part.
hitting children with busses, glad to see that’s already illegal
…for now.
We had “optional” corporal punishment.
You could choose swats with a paddle, or writing sentences over and over.
Most people took swats, but I just picked sentences and never did them. They’d double the amount a couple times and eventually stop asking for them.
But absolutely zero boys gave a shit about taking swats, it was no deterrent what so ever. Even knowing that there was an easy way out of the alternative, they’d just take swats and immediately forget it happened.
If anything it made behavior worse, because they could do whatever and then have a few seconds of discomfort later if and only if they were caught doing the bad thing.
I had heard from a guy from singapore that many young men had the idea around the canning that they could do that standing on their head kind of thing.
I don’t think that guy could take a Singapore caning and remain conscious, much less standing.
he talked like you could get one or two so it was like a macho thing. Oh you had 3, yeah I had 5 the other week no problem. I mean he was from singapore but may have been full of it I suppose but he did not come off that way and I knew him for a few years as he was in an academic program related to the lab I worked in.
But absolutely zero boys gave a shit about taking swats
Great time to remind everyone that the adult men who administer corporal punishment in schools do in fact take great pleasure in spanking teenage girls, and that girls opt-out of it more than boys because they know it will border on sexual assault.
Girls have a higher pain tolerance than boys. They just know the horrific implications of being alone in a room with an older man who has authority and permission to use violence.
Oh yeah, I think girls didn’t even have the option.
I dont know if the girls gym teacher just wouldn’t do it, or if none of them picked it, but none of them got swats.
But almost every gym class there was a line of boys waiting.
Im sure you have sources right? Would you share them so we can all spread the word?
What do you need a source on? I am not that poster but I am a professional dominatrix and I will vouch that women, including transwomen, tend to have much higher pain tolerance than men. This is pretty well known in BDSM. Note that doesn’t mean women don’t feel the pain - they definitely do. They can just take a lot more pain and for a lot longer time than most men.
As to the other part - duh. It’s pretty obvious a teacher would use any excuse at physical touch as an opportunity to assault a student if he was so inclined. That’s how most predators operate, who get away with it - in the realm of plausible deniability. Predators are always looking for that wiggle room that gives them space to assault while simultaneously denying it. It’s why they prey on children in the first place.
Girls have a higher pain tolerance than boys.
Sounds like the sort of thing a doctor says while explaining himself at an inquisition.
I’m seeing conflicting research on a cursory look.
spanking teenage girls
This is a thing that happens?
Just ask current Auburn University head football coach Hugh Freeze.
Well that was disgusting.
It’s okay. He said he loves Jesus. We’re all fine!!!
At my school, the principal wasn’t allowed to paddle girls. Only boys.
I don’t know who made that rule but I can imagine why.
Im sure you have sources right? Would you share them so we can all spread the word?
We’ll. Unless you want me to call up my middle school gym teacher I dont really know what you want me to do here champ…
But part of that is because you replied to a long comment asking for a source without mentioning what you were talking about.
Even then, looking at my entire comment I have absolutely zero idea what the fuck you’re asking for here.
Ah dammit. I replied to the wrong comment, sorry.
I was looking for the one that says men mostly love hitting girls for sexual reasons and girls have a much higher pain tolerance. Or something to that tune.
Heres my argument against hitting kids. Mississippi loves it, cant get enough of it. Every ailment of society is caused by kids not getting hit enough, and they wear their past of childhood violence as their biggest badge of honor. Hitting kids is how you get Mississippians.
"Mississippi ranks 39th in violent crime among all states and has the third-lowest violent crime rate in the South. "
Is it … working?
Or they ain’t so gud at countin’.
So I started actually looking up numbers and they indeed look good from certain sources, but I’m still giving them the side eye. For instance, the CDC shows Mississippi as having the #1 murder rate among the states in 2022.
Is the point of hitting children to reduce violent crime? I have a feeling there are better ways. Maybe we should work on getting rid of microplastics.
Violent crime in rural areas is dramatically underreported because cops don’t even take reports for domestic violence unless it requires an ambulance ride.
deleted by creator
I like how america is slowly making it into the XIX c. Well done america!
I’m sure whatever country you’re from has fully rejected out-of-date ideas.
This issue is one of the only debates in the world that I don’t have a strong stance about. How the hell do you balance the fact that the kids are evil little (or large) monsters in desperate need of discipline with the fact that the ones passing judgement on them are no better?
deleted by creator
Teaching a child “I will hurt you if you don’t do what I want” is called bullying. That’s why we stop children doing it to other children.
It teaches them nothing but to fear you and possibly to pass that idea that children should fear their parents on to their own children.
In schools? How is this even still an open question? I thought the debate had at least moved on to whether parents should be allowed to hurt their children, even in the US.
It was banned in public schools 30 years ago, this extends the ban to private schools
Not in every state.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Associated Press:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceInternet Archive - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Internet Archive:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceI’m of the position that violence (broadly speaking, including the smallest offences) is never the best answer to a misbehaving child (or adult for that matter), but there are times when it’s not the worst answer either. When parents don’t have the skills to raise children with other methods, the net result just becomes that the children aren’t raised at all.
Somehow I seem to have gotten through 14 years of parenting a good kid without once hitting her for any reason.
The most violent thing I’ve ever done is grab her wrist and pull her quickly when she was a toddler and on the sidewalk and suddenly decided to try to run off the curb and into traffic. And that wasn’t punishment, that was a last resort to stop her from accidentally killing herself.
This is commendable of course. Do you think it’s because you’re just a better person, or because the child was a better person? Where would you put yourself in the nature vs nurture dimension?
I think it’s because there’s never a reason to hit a child. It has no idea with being a “better person,” whatever that means.
I agree that there’s never a good reason to hit a child. I mean unless you’re training martial arts with them or something, but that’s obviously not what this is about.
Surely a person with better self-control (like yourself, apparently) is a better person? Or a person who doesn’t turn to violence when they get too angry to control themselves. Especially as a parent, who is constantly pushed towards angry, at least at some points of parenthood. That’s what I was wondering about: were you a parent with superior self-control or were you a parent with the sort of a child that you didn’t really need superior self-control?
I had my first child decades ago, and until then I had the self-image of being a calm person with a pretty high level of self-control. That image sure vanished quickly, and I was poorly prepared for the dissonance.
You’re the one making this better and worse judgment, not me. All I am saying is that there is no good reason to hit a child.
Do you feel awkward being called a better person? I’m not doing it sarcastically or as a trap.
No, I just don’t think you are really in the position to judge it, only knowing a tiny bit about me. I could be horrific in other ways. But I appreciate it.
Studies have shown that even small acts of violence have detrimental effect on the brain so no, it’s never not the worst, it is always bad.
Can you cite such studies, please?
Thank you for asking. Here is a more recent one. https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/usable-knowledge/21/04/effect-spanking-brain
deleted by creator
Great source, thank you!
This will sound like I’m shifting the goalposts (and perhaps it is), but I was at least on some abstract level thinking of something more benign than spanking.
In school and 99% of scenarios, physicality doesn’t do any good. But if you have a really young child, like 3-5, and they hurt another child or an animal and show no remorse, I think spanking is acceptable as a punishment immediately after the incident. They might have trouble with developing empathy and need to understand they hurt another being.
The answer to a child showing such violent tendencies is therapy, not causing them pain.
How does their adult role model hitting them not just teach them that hitting is socially acceptable?
Teaching this to a kid without empathy seems like the worst imaginable circumstance lol.
And I sure as hell don’t want someone other than the parents ever making that decision.
This is the same logic given for school aged children to not fight back against bullies for decades, and bullying is now a huge problem.
I’m talking about a situation where your own child is exhibiting bullying characteristics at a very young age. You can’t sit them down and explain why pulling their sibling’s hair shouldn’t give them gratification…they still want to do it. Just when you’re not around. The consequences have to be emotionally driven, and something they can understand and feel even when an adult is not present. What’s your alternative? Timeout? Take a toy away?
I had a brother who tormented me for many years. My parents tried various things, and nothing worked. The thing that did work was me hitting him in the face with a metal belt when I was like ten when he physically attacked me for the millionth time. He just name-called after that, never touched me.
Obviously an adult is not going to do something like that. But how do you correct a very young child who is exhibiting signs that they are growing into a bully?
No it’s not the same logic. Someone in power hitting someone teaches kids that it is acceptable to use physical violence to get your way, this encourages the child to do even more violence. A victim fighting back against their bully is self defence, it is a different situation completely. I support training victimized kids to fight and stand up for themselves, I don’t support allowing adults to hit kids as punitive measures.
There’s no easy answer to the situation you describe, but the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that corporal punishment makes things worse, not better. Self defence against a bully is a completely different situation.
This is the same logic given for school aged children to not fight back against bullies for decades, and bullying is now a huge problem.
So you literally want to teach your kid to be violent? You’re staying very far from “teaching empathy” with this one…
I’m talking about a situation where your own child is exhibiting bullying characteristics at a very young age.
Yeah, those kids usually have violent parents. Of course you think this is a problem to be solved with violence. Too bad you haven’t figured out yet that you’re the reason your kid is violent.
You can’t sit them down and explain why pulling their sibling’s hair shouldn’t give them gratification…
You literally can. You just have no patience to talk to your kids, and use violence instead.
But how do you correct a very young child who is exhibiting signs that they are growing into a bully?
By not being the parent that normalizes violence as a solution to problems.
In school and 99% of scenarios, physicality doesn’t do any good. But if you have a really young child, like 3-5…
You think violence against children is only acceptable if you’re beating a toddler? That’s a really weird conclusion to reach…
I think spanking is acceptable as a punishment immediately after the incident.
Because you’re a shit parent who doesn’t know how to raise a child without resorting to violence. The evidence overwhelmingly shows that negative reinforcement is the worst way to discipline a child. If you think it works, you’re wrong.
They might have trouble with developing empathy and need to understand they hurt another being.
You’re teaching them, by example, to use violence. You’re the parent. Be a role model. How can you possibly think you can use violence to teach that violence is wrong?
Why is the fleet assembled then? Looks like they’re going on a schoolbus spree
Good job. Keep making conservatives actively confront their weird, inhumane, hateful bullshit on its face.
The gop is the party of hungry, beaten kids, sitting in understaffed schools, without schoolbooks, and distracted by construction noise from the publicly funded ten commandments statue going up near the school entrance between the active shooter drills. They sit there, nodding off and tired from working a double at the Tyson chichen slaughterhouse the night before.
And never forget, matt gaetz is sitting in the parking lot waiting to offer your kids a ride after school…
“would you like a ride to another state where it’s legal for me to do you?”
I went to a small rural school for a year when I was in elementary. The music teacher head paddle he’d use when it was your birthday. Wanna know the really fucked up part about it all? His paddle has holes drilled into it.
That’s a slapstick
Wait, it was allowed up until now?
Laws for physically harming children are super messed up. Children are legally nearly a slave class in this country. Their parents can 100% hit them (“within reason”) and it’s not child abuse. If a child retaliates at all, the child can actually have charges pressed against them by the parent.
I have heard numerous numerous stories of this exact situation: parent starts beating kid to discipline. it gets out of hand/kid won’t tolerate any more, so they call 911. Police show up, tell kid not only are they not arresting parent, but it is parent’s right to hit kid and discipline as they see fit (within the law). But if parent wants they can see about charges to kid if kid hit them or destroyed property.
This is also very similar as to what happens when women call for domestic violence - the police threaten to arrest the victim. Really really often. It’s almost like police are domestic abusers themselves.
Patriarchal violence…
But true, the US is one of the few countries that didn’t sign the children’s rights convention
Sources please. Never heard this. Always heard the cops do little, sometimes heard the system works. Have not heard cops tell kids they can be hit. (Edit: not doubting, just more in a wtf state.)
I mean, these are personal stories people have told me. That’s my source. I’ve spoken with thousands of people about their childhood trauma from tons of different backgrounds, including foster children.
Look at child abuse laws in your state. How are they defined? Anything short of that is completely allowed as discipline. If you give me your state (or name an example state if that’s too personal), I’ll post the laws.
If you’d like a resource to verify that, either call your local CPS office or non-emergency police. They are public servants. Ask them. They will tell you. It’s completely true. You can even put locks on your fridge and partially starve your kid as long as it doesn’t threaten their lives.
Technically in AZ you can rap the knuckles of a student with a ruler. You’ll still get fired for hitting a kid but I am pretty sure you are safe from a lawsuit.
Catholic schools still hit kids, iirc. Fairly certain it’s legal in private schools. (In AZ)
There’s still a handful of red states with it on the books as well. Yes, it’s everyone you think it is.
