Strollerderby : corporal punishment

When Spanking Is Outlawed, Only Outlaws (American and Somali) Will Spank!

Kate Tuttle — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:31:00 GMT

Last week I wrote about the death of an Indian schoolgirl due to corporal punishment, which got me reading about corporal punishment rules worldwide, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), an international treaty that has been signed by 193 of the world's countries -- that's every member of the United Nations save two. Guess who hasn't signed it yet? The United States -- along with that bastion of human rights, Somalia.

This week conservative parenting guru John Rosemond had an editorial in the Washington Times about how the US needs to stand strong against signing the UNCRC, because he feels it would erode the rights of parents. Because there's been an influx of new political pressure to sign the treaty now that Obama's in office (clearly Bush was never going to sign it), he urges readers to seek more information and then to "call or write to your senators and let them know how you would like them to vote should ratification come to the Senate floor. Given that ours is still a government of, for and by the people, let us pray that the people make themselves heard!"

Shockingly enough, I totally agree. But first, read more about the UNCRC and figure out what you want to tell them when you call. If you are eager to preserve your right to spank your child, you may urge them to vote no, when and if it comes up. But first read it yourself; you may find that you like what it has to say. A sampling, and this is what I found when visiting the site Rosemond himself recommends, a site opposed to the UNCRC:

Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.
Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.
A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.
According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.
Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.
Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.

This is meant to be scary stuff! But to me -- and to the people of Canada, Mexico, England, Australia, all of Western Europe, all of Africa, all of South and Central America, etc. -- it sounds pretty reasonable. Clearly numbers 4, 5, and 7 are kind of red herring-ish (we have a busy enough court system as it is). But just as clearly Rosemond and his ilk find it scary to contemplate a nation in which children are free from physical punishment, free to choose their own religion, and free to learn about sex, science, and other religions -- not to mention one which supports children's welfare with more than just rhetoric.

Sounds like a country that truly would leave no child behind. What a huge step forward it would be if we could join the rest of the world in that goal.

The Guy's Kind Of A Jerk, But He's Got a Point

More by this author:

They Say: Bilingual Babies Learn Better

Why Are We So Shocked When Women Kill?

(Public) Breastfeeding Now Legal in Massachusetts

Another Hospital Baby Mix-Up, Now With Added Racism!

When Discipline Kills: Indian Schoolgirl Dies After Punishment

Kate Tuttle — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 18:31:00 GMT

An 11-year-old girl in India died this week after being forced to stand in the sun for two hours, with bricks on her shoulders, for not successfully reciting the English alphabet in class. Eventually, the child vomited, then fainted, and was taken to the hospital where she later died.

Worse yet, some reports indicate that the girl, Shano Khan, had been repeatedly punished in school due to her poor attendance -- which itself was caused by her having had a seizure condition. School officials are blaming her death on her chronic illness, while of course any sane person would say that when you take a medically fragile person, then subject her to physical abuse, you shouldn't be shocked when something awful happens.

According to the BBC, the country's municipal schools tend to serve a poor population and teachers there are known to punish students severely, while anyone who can afford to sends their kids to private schools, which do not use corporal punishment (beatings are outlawed for all schools, but apparently the rule is frequently flouted).

The teacher has been charged, and both she and the school's principal suspended, and the girl's family is reportedly being compensated for her loss. But as her father points out, this will not bring back their child.

Shockingly, corporal punishment is still legal in public schools in 23 US states. The seven states listed as "most violent" in terms of amount and severity of coporal punishment in schools are Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Indiana, Arkansas, Louisiana and South Carolina. As we ponder the shocking early death of a girl like Shona Kahn, it's worth reflecting on what can be done to end state-sanctioned violence against children in schools closer to home.

More by this author:

They Say: Bilingual Babies Learn Better

Why Are We So Shocked When Women Kill?

(Public) Breastfeeding Now Legal in Massachusetts

Another Hospital Baby Mix-Up, Now With Added Racism!

Does Madonna Spank Her Kids?

Brett Singer — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:00:00 GMT

Somewhat buried in the news about Madonna's adopted son David Banda meeting up with his biological father in Malawi was this little tidbit (this is David's dad Yohane talking about his chat with David):

He told me his mum likes riding horses and that he too rides horses. Then he told me a story when one day he and his brother, Rocco, rode horses and fell. He told me his mum spanked him because they are not supposed to ride horses on their own. (Emphasis added)

Whoa, Nellie! Hang on a minute. Madonna spanked him?

Well, maybe. When I first saw this, Shannon pointed out that sometimes little kids exaggerate. I've never hit either of my children but my oldest once informed someone that I had. Somewhat out of the blue, I might add. Luckily it was a person who was inclined to take my word for it (a relative). But if it had been a teacher, I don't know how that would have gone over.

Still, it's interesting to think about. Do you think Madonna spanks her kids? Or maybe she has the nanny do it? Or is David just a little kid exaggerating?

Source: PerezHilton

Homebirthing Advocate's Baby Dies During Homebirth

Another Country Joins the Ban Against Corporal Punishment

Madonna/Angelina Dichotomy: Why is Adoption Okay for One Star but not the Other?

Peeper Madness - Supeep Court

Texas School Accused Of Student Cage Fighting

Jimmy Kimmel And The Octomom

Babysitter Jailed for Removing Clothes In Front of Child

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:30:00 GMT

A Florida mother is paying a very high price for a serious babysitting faux pas. Sarah Slicker, known by the unfortunate nickname “Naked Nanny” in the Tampa Bay area where she’s from, recently served one year of jail time and two years of house arrest for taking off her clothes in front of the four-year-old boy she was babysitting for. She’s now petitioning the courts to reduce her ten-year probation—which prohibits her from having contact with kids besides her own children—so that her son can have a normal childhood.

At first glance, I was unequivcally outraged by the excessiveness of Slicker’s punishment. But the full story makes the case far less clear cut. Slicker had long been known as a stellar childcare provider in her area. But one day while babysitting for a four-year-old boy, she put on a James Bond movie (WTF numero uno). After a love scene, the boy asked her to take off her clothes. She complied (WTF numero dos). The boy’s mother walked in on the “naked nanny,” and was quite understandably none too pleased.

Slicker later explained that she simply hadn’t wanted to argue with the boy because she was “physically and emotionally exhausted.” I think we can all understand that level of childcare-related exhaustion—but how about Dora the Explorer instead of James Bond? Or a cookie instead of full frontal nudity?

Clearly, this woman exercised disturbingly terrible judgment and she should have been fired from all of her childcare jobs, at the very least. But I can’t help thinking there’s a hypocritical sexual prudishness at work in her punishment. It’s perfectly legal for parents in the U.S. to whip their kids, but a nanny who never inappropriately laid hands on a child loses her freedom for 13 years?

Slicker, who is now married and employed, was denied her request for a reduction in her probation. Do you think the punishment fits the crime?

Photo: sptimes.com

Dad Beats the Demon out of His Son

JeanneSager — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:01:00 GMT

We've all thought our kids were little devils, but when you start to feel guilty for thinking bad thoughts kid-ward, take heart you aren't this guy:

A Texas dad told cops he beat his son to a pulp to rid him of a demon that he believed invaded his home . . . and the three-year-old's body.

Neighbors of Jacky Tran told the Houston Chronicle they saw him throwing furniture out of his house because he thought it was "evil," and the little boy unfortunately fared even worse. Tran was reportedly seen swinging the child, who suffered head fractures but is expected to be OK.

Why is it the stories you hear are either this side of crazy or the parent next door who lets their three-year-old run around the library like a banshee? I guess because the rest of us just aren't newsworthy as we trudge along, thinking the occasional "they're driving me crazy" thought about our kids but not acting on them.

Tran, in particular, sounds like he's mentally ill and should face some psychiatric evaluation before a judge decides if he'll serve the five to ninety-nine years he's face if convicted. And as horrible as this sounds, I think a tiny part of a lot of us knows, we're lucky to be absolutely, achingly normal.

Image: About.com

Another Country Bans Spanking

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:55:00 GMT

The Philippines is on the verge of outlawing all forms of physical punishment against children, with legislators arguing that children have the same right to be free from violence as adults.

The bill’s sponsors have also cited studies that show that physical punishment does not improve children’s behavior in the long term. Violence will stop the misbehavior in the moment, but over time it simply increases a child’s silent distrust of his guardian and therefore his tendency to act out.

Parents who rely on spanking or hitting often argue that it simply keeps their kids in line and does not constitute abuse. (These were the same arguments used to defend "wife hitting" until the 1960s.) But there is no way to tell what long-term effects hitting will have on a child. Children who are the victims of corporal punishment are more likely to disrespect authority, to be unusually aggressive, and to end up in jail. Of course, kids are resilient and many people who were hit as children grow into healthy adults. But there is simply no reason to risk instilling deeply rooted anger, aggression, and emotional distancing in a child.

These are the same commonsense arguments behind many European countries’ ban of corporal punishment in the schools and at home. Tragically, the United States lags far behind other industrialized countries in protecting the rights of children. It is the only U.N. nation other than Somalia that refuses to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. In all 50 states, it is legal for parents to hit, spank, paddle, or whip their children. In 23 states, corporal punishment is legal in public schools. And in every single state except for Minnesota, it is legal for parents accused of child abuse to evoke their right to corporal punishment in their defense.

And we wonder why teens believe it was all right for Chris Brown to express his anger at Rihanna by beating her up.

Image: Scoop

Why Teens Are Quick to Blame Rihanna

Elementary School Essay Lands Dad in Jail

JeanneSager — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:20:00 GMT

I'm not sure which part is more depressing: that a father would shoot his son with a BB gun or that the boy would think it normal to write about in a school essay.

A Wisconsin nine-year-old related the day his father shot him in the buttocks for not moving out from in front of the TV screen in an essay for his teacher; and the teacher called in police to investigate the boy's father.

The dad, David J. Peschl, was subsequently arrested on a felony count of child abuse. He admits to the incident, but says it wasn't malicious or even a form of discipline. It was "horseplay," he says, and he regretted it immediately after it happened. Regretted it, maybe, because he realized he'd end up in jail?

The little boy apparently wrote in the essay that the moment was the "most painful thing I ever felt in my life," and says his mother could hear him screaming from the road. His father says the wording of the essay doesn't sound like his son, inferring that the boy had "help" from a teacher in crafting the piece. Although I agree kids embellish, it's not hard to imagine a nine-year-old saying the time his father shot him in the behind with a BB gun was the worst moment of his life. He was shot . . . with a BB gun . . . by his father.

That's not horseplay. Horseplay is wrestling a child to the ground and giving them a noogie. Horseplay is tickling them until they move out from in front of the TV. Horseplay is throwing a blanket over their head and yelling "now you can't see the TV either" or something equally silly. Shooting them in the hind end with a BB gun? That's simply cruel - and I dare say abusive (hey, police agree - look at the charge).

It's sad that a father would do this to his child, but a small part of me is even sadder that the child thought this was normal. That of all the moments in his life, he thought of this one to write about for a school essay - as if it were just another moment like any other.

Or do you think this was a simple cry for help? That the nine-year-old was too afraid to speak about this in words to his teacher, so he wrote through the pain to share his tale?

Image: Kids.Indianeducation (not the boy in the story)

Dad Jailed for Head-Butting Tot

JeanneSager — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 15:01:00 GMT

A Michigan dad is in jail for allegedly head-butting his two-year-old daughter; and I can see a long line of parents kicking themselves for trying the same trick.

Think about it. The little girl had climbed on his lap, and her head hit his. So he used his head to butt her forehead. She had some swelling, but nothing that required hospitalization. It hardly sounds like a case of major child abuse.

The details of the case are limited, so I can't say honestly say whether or not Dwayne Rowe blew his top and deserves to be jailed. I'm certainly not saying that violence is the best way to go, and someone who saw this happen apparently thought this was bad enough to call the cops.

So let's take this out of the Rowe home and into yours. Your two-year-old climbs up on your lap, she slams her head into yours because she thinks it's funny. What do you do?

At that age, a lot of kids like to headbutt. My daughter used to sit on my lap and throw herself backward - hitting my forehead, my chest, my glasses . . . whatever was in the way. I had to start holding my hand out, just behind her head, essentially keeping her head in place so she couldn't use it as a battering ram. That's probably the best (non-violent) way of getting kids to stop this - they start to get angry because they realize they can't freely move their heads. It's not fun for anyone - but they need to learn that hurting someone else isn't funny.

I didn't head-butt her, but I've seen parents try it. It's akin to the "bite the biting child" trick. Does the shock value of the act - teaching a child that their actions really hurt - make this OK? Or is head-butting just another way a parent crosses the line?

Image: BBC

They Say: Heat Won't Really Escape Through Their Heads

Indian Child Welfare Act: Bad for Parents?

Jersey Dad Fakes His Own Son's Death for Money

Hitting the Bottle: We've Got Your Alibi

Bus Driver Spanks 6 Year Old For Not Sitting Down

JeanneSager — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:59:00 GMT

A six-year-old won't sit down on the bus. What do you do? If you're one Oregon bus driver, you spank his little tushie and put him back in his seat.

Or maybe (just thinking out loud here), you could put his seatbelt on and tell him to sit there . . . then write him up for disobeying and put it in the hands of administrators and his parents? Apparently, I wouldn't make much of a bus driver.

Parents of the kids on the bus have told the Eagle Point School District they'd like him removed - citing not only the spanking incident but the fact that he's an erratic driver, frequently accelerating and slamming on the brakes. The district told an Oregon newspaper it's already taken appropriate disciplinary action. Therefore: case closed.

Wait, what? He gets to touch hand to tuchus and go about his merry way? This is not a spank or not to spank issue. Because that's something parents can argue about. This guy wasn't a parent. And as such, he doesn't get to use corporal punishment.

Bus drivers don't have it easy; I'll grant you that. They're at the front of the bus, with their backs turned to a large group of kids. On the drive home, that back is facing a group of youngsters who want nothing more than to get out the energy that's been pent up all day while they sat in a classroom with hands a scribblin' and legs a wigglin'. Kids learn naughty things on the bus because there is little a driver can do when he's paying attention to traffic and seated at the far end from where a bunch of kids are talking about s-e-x.

But I'll give you the same argument here that I gave to giving teachers extravagant gifts to make up for the crappy pay: they chose this job. The degree of difficulty does not give them a bye on treating our children according to the laws of the land. They're hired to protect our kids, transport them home. Taking someone's six-year-old over your knee to teach them a lesson? That's assault people.

Image: 2News.TV

When Your Kid's is the Puny Gift to the Teacher

Students Watch Autopsy of Teen From School

School Security Guard Teaches Biology Class

Mom Gets Hate Mail for Ending Kids Thanksgiving Party

Male Blogger: Laboring Mom Not a 'True Emergency'

Coach Who Beat Volleyball Player Resigns

Shannon LC Cate — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 22:03:00 GMT

The coach who beat a player for missing serves in a game has resigned from his Chicago school. The player, a senior named Bruce Zayas was hurt so badly that his mother couldn't help but notice. After she retained a lawyer and investigation opened and several schools and sports are now suspected of using this practice.

Am I alone in being completely shocked by this? Maybe I'm naive, I'm the first to admit I know nothing about the sports, but does threatening someone with violence (not to mention actually beating someone to a point that they can't sit, as Coach did to Bruce) in fact improve their athletic performance? Apparently, Bruce had been recruited from another school to play volleyball and he was counting on a volleyball scholarship to attend college. After this incident (the incident in which he outed the coach) the team shunned him and he was treated so badly that he quit. Now he isn't sure what his path to college will be.

I really don't know which is worse: a society that fosters and covers up for physical abuse from adults entrusted to educate and be role-models for our children, or a society that leaves a kid no route to college but sports.

Scientific Reasons Not to Hit Your Kids–Ever

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:29:00 GMT

The majority of parents raise their hands to their children from time to time. And the vast majority of people who physically punish their kids are loving, devoted parents. They don’t see anything wrong with spanking or slapping their kids, and this view is all but condoned by our society. This makes sense: a quick slap or a spanking is bound to stop misbehavior in the moment.

But, as the child psychiatrist Alan E. Kadzin argues, corporal punishment not only does not permanently change behavior; it actually increases aggressive and noncompliant behavior in the long run. And children who are hit by their parents are also more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression, to do poorly in school, and to have strained relationships with their parents. That’s a whole lot of good reasons not to ever raise your hands to your children, especially since corporal punishment is likely to become increasingly severe and frequent over time.

Unfortunately, these clear scientific findings are not enough to change parents’ behavior. 85 percent of adolescents have been corporally punished by their parents. This high number may be partly explained by studies finding that people who are confident in their parenting abilities are impervious to science that goes against their parenting style. So when society says that hitting children is okay, and a parent finds that hitting stops a child from talking back in that moment, the parent is unlikely to listen to a psychologist claiming that hitting doesn’t work.

Societal thinking must change before parents’ views on corporal punishment change. In 23 countries, it is illegal for parents to hit their children, and parents in these countries are, not surprisingly, more likely to view physical punishment unfavorably. In the United States, however, the prevailing wisdom is that parents have the right to discipline their children as they see fit, within certain obvious limits. But, as Kadzin argues, if it’s illegal for an adult to hit another adult, why should it be okay for adults to hit the smallest, most defenseless people?

Interestingly, and disturbingly, the United States is one of only two countries that has not ratified the U.N.’s Convention on the Rights of Children. The obvious argument against ratification is that it would infringe on parents’ rights, since it forbids violence against children, even in the home. But the less obvious argument is that it would prevent 17-year-olds from entering the armed forces.

I don't think science has a fighting chance of defeating that brand of national wisdom.

Image: bible.ca

Spanked! Is Your 3-Year-Old Getting It at Preschool?

Madeline Holler — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:25:00 GMT

I'm the first person to giggle/cringe/fume at all the feelings talk and redirection and tolerated annoying behaviors of kids young and old. But that's because I come from a long line of bitter, passive-aggressive control freaks. Lucky for my kids (crossing fingers, crossing fingers), I'm smart enough to know that kid brains are still developing, life is not easy and children's outward actions rarely correlate one-to-one with their inner needs/wants/emotions.

I'm also smart enough to farm my beauties out to the pros when I can. I get a little break. The kids are with other kids. And the pros know what they're doing. Because the pros are gifted in the childcare arts. Because the pros are supervised by other pros. Because the pros re-up their professional credits every summer and go on retreats and role play, role play, role play to collect the necessary "tools" for dealing with conflict and stubborness and the crankies in just the right way that everybody feels good and heard and special about themselves at the end of the day.

Right? Wrong!

According to a new Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union study, gobs of kids in the U.S. are getting spanked by their caregivers and teachers every year. Something like 200,000 of them. Some as young as 3! And African-American girls are getting it way more than any other demographic. I never thought to ask whether my youngest's preschool spanks the kids. Certainly not my older one's elementary school. I mean, who knew it was even an option?

From Reuters:

Twenty-one U.S. states still permit the use of corporal punishment in schools. In Texas and Mississippi children as young as 3 are struck for transgressions as minor as gum chewing, the report says.

The punishment often involves hitting a child on the buttocks with a long wooden board, or paddle.

In 13 states in the U.S. South where corporal punishment is the most prevalent, African-American girls are twice as likely to be hit as their white counterparts, according to the 125-page report.

"African-American students are punished at 1.4 times the rate that would be expected given their numbers in the student population," the groups said in a statement.

Texas is the capital for corporal punishment -- a quarter of the cases in the study hail (in my opinion, unsurprisingly) from this state (also winner in the capital punishment category!). Here's an old NY Times story where Texas educators defend the practice.

If your stomach hasn't turned enough, get this: the study found that students with physical or mental disabilities were subjected to a disproportionate rate of corporal punishment.

The study also documented cases of children being seriously injured, of course a rare occurance. But even if the majority of those getting hit at school do not leave school with bruises or red marks, I would lose my mind if a teacher or principal or daycare worker spanked my kid. Or even threatened to spank them. How about some redirection? Talk about feelings? Tolerance and role playing? I promise I'll stop rolling my eyes!

What would you do if you found out your child got spanked at school? Or are you all for corporal punishment (if the answer is yes, do you live in Texas? It's just a question!)

Should You Intervene When Strangers Hit Their Kids?

Photo: nospank.net

Should You Intervene When Strangers Hit Their Kids?

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:00:00 GMT

The other day while walking in the park, I passed by a disturbing scene. An enraged mother was marching after her daughter, shouting, “You are going to get hit! You are going to get hit!” Her daughter looked about three years-old, and she was bawling. After trying in vain to run away from her mother, the little girl covered her head with her hands as her mother caught up to her and made good on her threat.

The mother’s anger was so violent that, as I walked away from this sad scene, even I felt a little frightened. I could only imagine how the woman's rage had affected her young daughter. As I walked home, I felt completely helpless. I wondered if I had done the right thing to simply walk away. How else, I asked myself, could I have responded? I felt pretty certain that alerting one of the park's police officers wouldn’t have helped; most likely the only outcome would have been to make both the mother and her daughter feel even more freaked out. And telling the mother not to hit her child would have only increased her rage—who was I to tell her how to raise her children?

I thought of a story my mom had told me recently about a friend of hers. While walking in a supermarket, a man had seen a mother forcefully hit her small child, who kept reaching out for food items from her seat in the grocery cart. The man gently approached the mother, and made a sympathetic comment to the effect of, “I know how hard it can be with young children. It feels like they just won’t listen.” As the man spoke about his own difficulties with parenting, the mother started crying. “I know I shouldn’t hit her,” she said, “and I try not to. But it's so hard.” They spoke for a long time about other ways to discipline children. The mother was at her wit’s end, and really needed someone to simply ask if she was okay.

I hope the next time I encounter a child being mistreated, I am brave enough to try out this method of honest engagement. Has anyone ever tried confronting an enraged parent in this, or any other, way?

Photo: Spiritual Reseach Foundation

The Right and Wrong Way to Use Timeouts

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:17:00 GMT

Timeouts seem self-explanatory: your kid acts out; you make him go to his room or sit on a chair in the corner, by force if necessary; the worst the offense, the longer the timeout, right?

Wrong, wrong, wrong, says renowned child psychiatrist Alan E. Kazdin, writing for Slate. While timeouts can be effective, relying too heavily on the timeout as a method of punishment will do nothing to change your child’s problematic behavior. In fact, excessive timeouts worsen bad behavior—which means you give more and longer timeouts, which means your child acts out more, which means your home becomes a battlefield.

To avoid this, Kazdin recommends returning the timeout to its original meaning: a “timeout from reinforcement.” Rather than an angry punishment, the timeout was originally meant to be a simple withholding of attention, since kids tend to repeat behavior that garners attention of any kind. To hope that a timeout will cause a child to “think about what they’ve done” and repent is to be self-delusional.

Instead, use timeouts briefly, calmly, and immediately following the problematic behavior. Timeouts should never be physically enforced—dragging your child to his room, for instance, completely negates all of the timeout’s benefits, which are mostly accrued in the first minute or two of timeout. If your child refuses to cooperate with a timeout, raise the penalty by one minute or take away a privilege. On the other hand, always praise compliance with timeouts.

Kazdin points out (rather obviously, though it’s easy to forget in the heat of the moment when Susie hits her little sister for the third time in an hour) that the most important tool for changing problematic behavior is to actively work on replacing the hitting—or yelling or food throwing or painting on the walls—with positive behavior, through constant reminders and positive reinforcement.

And when that’s not working and all you want to do is lock the little miscreant in his room for 20 minutes, perhaps you need to give yourself a brief timeout from reinforcement.

Photo: hometown9.com

Teacher Who Threw Feces At Boy May Keep Job

MetroDad — Sun, 08 Apr 2007 13:04:00 GMT

The idea of corporal punishment in schools drives me totally insane. The idea of having teachers discipline kids by spanking them or rapping their knuckles with a ruler seems contrary to the important life lessons that we expect teachers to impart on our children. Sure, I know teaching is a rough job. My mom was a public school teacher for 20 years and she'd often share with me her frustrations in dealing with kids who were disruptively rowdy in her classes.

However, Maria Pantalone, a Toronto high school principal, seems to have gone a little overboard. According to news reports, Pantalone confessed to throwing human poop at a 12-year-old boy. Not only that but it seems that the court is ruling that she can get her job back! The circumstances of the incident have been sealed by the court because the victim is a minor. But in the principal's defense, the judge seems to think the circumstances were exceptional, and according to Pantalone, "I couldn't take it anymore. It was total, total frustration."

Yeah, I get it. Some kid was a brat and you lost your shit. Then, you threw it at him. But does that mean you deserve to get your job back? I don't think so. Do you?

Anti-Spanking Proposal Down for the Count

Mike Adamick (Cry It Out!) — Fri, 23 Feb 2007 13:56:00 GMT

A proposal to ban spanking was given an official time out, as the California lawmaker behind the plan says she just doesn't have the votes to get the bill passed. Still, Sally Lieber hasn't given up. She wants to ban throwing, kicking, burning, cutting, shaking or choking a minor -- essentially making more illegal things that already are. Sounds like Lieber got spanked. But good.

Her spanking proposal caught fire last month, landing in newspaper pages and on television throughout the country. "Saturday Night Live" even did a skit, featuring a nanny whose book, "I Will Beat Yo Ass," offers the best in parental guidance.

It appears that after Lieber heard from cops, DAs and judges -- who wondered how on earth they'd enforce a no-spanking law -- she backed down. Her new proposal would increase penalties for doing things that are already illegal -- a nice attempt, but I liked her first idea better.