Family law judge beats own daughter for using the internet.

[JustFU]

The worst part here is that this guy is a judge, who has probably taken peoples kids away who were decent parents, thrown people in jail, etc for losing their tempers or doing something like what he just did.

Guarantee though, this hypocritical fuck will probably say what he did was normal discipline. I spank my kids, but I've never beat them in the arms, legs, shoulders with a belt or anything else.

I'm hoping somewhere there is a fanatic with a bullet that has this guys name all fucking over it.

 

[turbolapp]

Actually, I'm trying to tease out the difference between properly administrated corporal punishment and corporal punishment administrated with a subconscious urge to relieve the stress pent up in the parent.

I'd say the correlation between problematic children and children who experienced violence is actually the correlation between problematic children and parents who abused the role of corporal punishment as a means to get out their own stress, enjoy power and control over another.

That, and scientific communities are notoriously left leaning and have a prejudice against conservative old-world ideas regardless of science.

Now keep in mind I'm not saying one should run around beating kids all day. I'm just saying that the arguments against corporal punishment are rooted in emotions, not reason. "But it's violence! Against your own child!"

But in the end, the neurological effects are the same whether you spank them, put them down verbally or take away their phone privileges.

There is just no instruction manual on how to hand out corporal punishment in a reasonable, safe manner.

So you're not actually basing your ideas on any supported research. But then you go ahead and say any data out there, that would contradict your ideas, (based on nothing but your own experience, or actually lack there of) would be predjudicial. Oh and when you realize this might not be a good enough argument you play the old "any thing using your brain and not your fists is LIBERAL" card.

How bout instead you show us the REAL science your referring to?

 

[Bofu2U]

According to who or what? How about instead of Jon banning someone from the forum for a month, he goes to their house and attacks them?

Just wanted to chime in and say that if that were a possibility I would not only want to watch it, but I may fly in to watch it live. You know, like a UFC fight.

 

[CharisMannequin]

To anyone whose saying she deserved it, or some shit, you're a fucking moron.

No one gives a shit if you're parents did it to you - that just means your parents are fucking crap as well; it doesn't mean it's right.
Hitting kids is a pathetic attempt at showing dominance and strength. I did have some spanking when I was bad as a kid, perhaps twice in my entire life. Y'know what? It didn't work.

Physical violence is resorted to by clueless inbreds who can't think of any sensible way to discipline a child (i.e in this example, take the kid's PC away...DUH.)

Fuck me, what's this world coming to?

 

[turbolapp]

No, it's rooted in study in study after that is devoid of emotion. If spanking is the only the way to keep a young child away from a hot stove, then you can make a argument for it, but I'd love to hear the "logical" argument for corporal punishment against teenagers.

Prison inmates are not administered beatings. It would just cause them to have more pent up anger, which they would unleash upon society when they get released. This is basic logic that is true whether or not people feel emotional sympathy for prisoners.

Yeah I bet most of these people have problems when cops beat people, and these are adults, most of them douchebags, but a creature, 1/3 your size, that just just came into this world a few years ago? have at em.

Listen, lets say your able to establish this elusive "proper physical punishment" (and that's a big if) The question I would then ask is Why? Why are you so bound and determined to hit your child? When there is little research evidence that physical punishment improves children's behavior in the long term, plenty of alternative forms of non physical discipline and substantial research evidence that physical punishment puts children at risk for negative outcomes, including increased aggression, antisocial behavior, mental health problems, and possible physical injury. You really gotta wonder that about yourself.

When you really think (yes think, not feel) it's just beyond logical.

 

[learningcurve]

I'm not going to attack the way anyone here decides to bring up their children like someone else, but as a father of four (one with special needs), I spank my children when I feel it is required.

I just don't believe that grounding them, or taking away their xbox/playstaion rights is enough in some cases. For the mosy part, kids won't understand the concept of what they have done wrong, simply because in most cases, it is an adult construct. My kids are extremely bright but not adults with fully developed ideas of socially acceptable behaviour. If I do spank them, I explain why. but I believe anyone (not just children) need discipline.

I'm sure that there is a mountain of evidence to support not hitting your children gathered by people that don't want it to happen, just as there is evidence to support disciplining your child by people that support that theory.

FWIW, I hardly spank my kids anymore as they have gotten to the age where they understand better the idea of each action having its own consequence in a way that is meaningful. I also have four of the most beautiful and happy children you could ever meet, who are thoughtful, respectful, and loving individuals.

BTW...I do think there is a difference between spanking your children and beating the shit out of them. The latter was done to me with electrical extension chords when I got out of line, something I would never do to my children.

AT the end of the day though, it comes down to personal choice and what you believe. Anyone that says there is a right or a wrong way is just plain ignorant. With that said, just don't beat the shit out of your kids (yes, there is a diffference).

JMO

 

[HiGhPeR]

By NO means do I agree with what this guy did in the video. He went way overboard. But, I really hope you people who are complaining about hitting your kids aren't the same mother fuckers letting those spoiled, undisciplined kids run around throwing things and screaming their heads off while I'm having dinner at a restaurant. Or worse on a fucking airplane. Just curious --- if the kid doesn't stop his or her tantrum/spaz attack, whats the next step for all of you who don't believe in "hitting"? No ice cream?

 

[clenard]

He's lucky he had a daughter to beat, and that wasn't a 16yo son he was beating, because the son would have probably came back with an aluminum bat.

If he had that much aggression in him, he should have went to a bar, and picked a fight with someone his own size. Not a 16yo girl.

Agreed. Anyone who can't see that this guy is nothing more than a power hungry douchebag with little man syndrome is blind. The girl...FEMALE...who had Cerebral Palsy is getting BEAT, not spanked. I've seen some abusive men before, but even they would cringe at this.

Over a computer game? Yeah, true obedience.

And to think -- this guy is a judge. How many innocent people has he screwed over due to his anger issues?

 

[thehobbster]

Now try and step outside your own little head for a moment and ask yourself if you are perhaps a bit biased in your last statement there?

If you are a boxer, then a solid blow to your torso is No big deal... For a ballerina, however, it could put them into the hospital or even kill them.

You feel that this beating is "tame," but what if you were on one of only 1,000 families on the planet who would stoop so low?

That doesn't make the whole worlds' standard "Tame," it makes your family Psychopathic and dangerous. (Along with mine, I assure you.)

America is a very uncivilized country... The rest of the world, even 3rd-world countries look down on us & our parental standards more than you would ever believe.

Thanks for giving me the perspective, because I surely can't see outside of my own little head as a trained psychologist working in the field. I see fist fights DAILY worse than this. I work at a residential treatment center for teens who have been resistant to therapy. These are the kids who land in prison. Most of them do exactly as others have said. They test boundaries. And most people on the planet are just as Fight Club stated. They run away from a confrontation. They don't set a boundary. So the kids get more and more out of whack and OVERSTEP boundaries that are actually in place. Sometimes setting boundaries doesn't do the job. There needs to be a boundary further out that is more fierce. That is reality. Not every child fits into the mold of the malleable and pliable poster child. Some of them are psychotic and sociopathic and have to be conditioned by having their actions associated with extreme pain and discomfort. Physical discomfort is the only means sometimes.

And no, we never smack kids at the facility. But if we could it would help in some cases, and hurt in some cases.

 

[stmadeveloper]

I've got 4 kids - 2 of which are my step kids. They got abused regularly by their step mom to the point where they were diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

We are having fun with them now as fucked up teenagers.

That was abuse - plain and simple. I teach my kids to stand up for themselves, and there is no doubt that i'm in control here. I'm sure the parents pay for the internet, the computer -- to act like they weren't in control is stupid.

You can manage kids with out beating the shit out of them like that.

 

[potentialeight]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0OUNTI0Oa8"]Butt-Whooping On Facebook for being a Fake Gang Member - YouTube[/ame]

I like this one better.

 

[Moxie]

If I do spank them, I explain why. but I believe anyone (not just children) need discipline.

So even if there wasn't laws against it, why would most Walmart managers still never use that type of discipline on even their most boneheaded employees?

I'm sure that there is a mountain of evidence to support not hitting your children gathered by people that don't want it to happen, just as there is evidence to support disciplining your child by people that support that theory.

Last I knew, the limited amount of "pro spanking" evidence out there says that it doesn't make a difference either way, not that it helps kids to turn out better.

Just curious --- if the kid doesn't stop his or her tantrum/spaz attack, whats the next step for all of you who don't believe in "hitting"? No ice cream?

What if it was a 50 year old man with a mental condition? In that case, I can see his provider threatening that he will have to leave the restaurant or that he will get "toys" taken away or whatever. Hitting would never be an option for most relatives or mental health workers in that scenario.

 

[learningcurve]

So even if there wasn't laws against it, why would most Walmart managers still never use that type of discipline on even their most boneheaded employees?

They would probably just fire them eventually wouldn't they?? Isn't that a consequence? Maybe, just maybe, if they were disciplined correctly when they were younger they wouldn't be such fucktards in the real world situations when they get older.

Last I knew, the limited amount of "pro spanking" evidence out there says that it doesn't make a difference either way, not that it helps kids to turn out better.

Probably not and I'm not going to waste my time trying to find any. I know what worked/works for my kids and will stick with it. I'm sure as the perfect parent you have every right to judge me.

I know I won't sway anyone or win any arguments in this thread and I am not trying to. I'm not here to defend my opinion, simply express it. I'm also not going to judge anyone for their opinions either.

 

[HiGhPeR]

...What if it was a 50 year old man with a mental condition? In that case, I can see his provider threatening that he will have to leave the restaurant or that he will get "toys" taken away or whatever. Hitting would never be an option for most relatives or mental health workers in that scenario.

I'm not talking about somebody over 50 with a mental condition..

 

[amateursurgeon]

By NO means do I agree with what this guy did in the video. He went way overboard. But, I really hope you people who are complaining about hitting your kids aren't the same mother fuckers letting those spoiled, undisciplined kids run around throwing things and screaming their heads off while I'm having dinner at a restaurant. Or worse on a fucking airplane. Just curious --- if the kid doesn't stop his or her tantrum/spaz attack, whats the next step for all of you who don't believe in "hitting"? No ice cream?

No, I don't... that's antisocial. My toddler sits down at restaurants and eats her food quietly. It's a fairly frequent occurrence that people come up to me and remark on how well behaved she is.

If she gets up, I just tell her to sit down again and she obeys.

This is going to sound weird, but I used positive reinforcement animal training principles to train my child. I reward good behaviour and make a fuss of her. If she starts acting out, I ignore her. If she starts whining, I tell her gently and firmly to stop whining, then ignore her if she continues. She doesn't whine any more, because she's realised it achieves nothing. It takes a lot of self-discipline on my part, but luckily I am an extremely patient person.

Believe it or not, children have an inbuilt need to please / get attention from their parents. That's a far more powerful (and flexible) tool than violence.

It took a bit of time to teach her that displeasing me means I'll ignore her, but now all I need to do is raise my voice slightly and she gets the idea.

I'm aware that this approach has its own dangers, so once she's older I'm going to switch to reasoning with her, but she's too young for that at the moment.

 

[Ar Scion]

No, it's rooted in study in study after that is devoid of emotion. If spanking is the only the way to keep a young child away from a hot stove, then you can make a argument for it, but I'd love to hear the "logical" argument for corporal punishment against teenagers.

Prison inmates are not administered beatings. It would just cause them to have more pent up anger, which they would unleash upon society when they get released. This is basic logic that is true whether or not people feel emotional sympathy for prisoners.

According to who or what? How about instead of Jon banning someone from the forum for a month, he goes to their house and attacks them?

The argument is simply this: In human experience, pain is as effective a motivator as pleasure. Relying too much on one or the other, or using one or the other in an unpredictable, unreasonable manner will create kids with problems regardless of pain or pleasure.

Pain is nothing so reprehensible as to be wiped off the face of the earth. It's better to treat the dichotomy of pain and pleasure as neutral forces that guide and shape human behavior rather than perpetually idolize pleasure and demonize pain.

Such a position will never be found in any study. It's more esoteric than that, and it certainly doesn't conform to the political agenda.

I'm going to make myself explicit here, just to get through to you guys:

I'm not advocating wanton, irresponsible physical abuse, regardless of age. The use of pain must be proportionate and reasonable, just as the use of pleasure must be proportionate.

You don't give your kid a handjob for cleaning his room, after all.

So you're not actually basing your ideas on any supported research. But then you go ahead and say any data out there, that would contradict your ideas, (based on nothing but your own experience, or actually lack there of) would be predjudicial. Oh and when you realize this might not be a good enough argument you play the old "any thing using your brain and not your fists is LIBERAL" card.

How bout instead you show us the REAL science your referring to?

It's esoteric. You're not going to find articles in journals to support it because of the political pussywhipping, 24/7 mollycoddling, I love you always, give people fish rather than teach people to fish, unlimited social services attitude in the social sciences.

Rather than looking at scientific journals for evidence, look at your own experience. When you experienced pain, did you overreact and lose your mind? Or did you recover from it and learn?

Is life devoid of pain? Failure? Rejection? Obstacles? Do people who run away from pain become better people, or do people who learn from pain, rise up and grow in response to it become better people?

Ask yourself, if pain is so bad and pleasure is so good, why does God (I assume you believe in him) allow both pain and pleasure into the experience of his children?

You wanna build resilience. You wanna build strength. Tolerance. You wanna build persistence, you don't do it with pleasure. You do it with pain.

Not torture, not constant frustration, but short bursts of challenges, obstacles, problems, just large enough for them to struggle against and overcome.

The social sciences are riddled with political pandering. Don't learn your beliefs from ideologues.

 

[amateursurgeon]

You wanna build resilience. You wanna build strength. Tolerance. You wanna build persistence, you don't do it with pleasure. You do it with pain.

Not torture, not constant frustration, but short bursts of challenges, obstacles, problems, just large enough for them to struggle against and overcome.

The social sciences are riddled with political pandering. Don't learn your beliefs from ideologues.

You're confusing pain & violence.

Pain is, indeed, an excellent teacher. I've frequently stood by and watched my daughter do something that I knew was going to end in her causing herself pain (e.g. by falling over - not anything that could injure her, obviously).

After hurting herself, she doesn't repeat the experience. She learns and grows.

Challenges, struggles, etc make us better people, and I believe in giving your child a lot of those.

That's a very different thing from violence. Violence is imposing your anger & frustration on another human being. The pain is actually the smallest part of it. The fear, rejection and humiliation of being hit by a parent are far stronger. That does nothing to build their character, it only teaches them to fear you.

Niccolo Machiavelli said it is better to be feared than loved, because you can control fear. He has a point, but he was giving advice on how to be a more effective tyrant. Is that what you think constitutes parenting?

 

[Ar Scion]

You're confusing pain & violence.

Pain is, indeed, an excellent teacher. I've frequently stood by and watched my daughter do something that I knew was going to end in her causing herself pain (e.g. by falling over - not anything that could injure her, obviously).

After hurting herself, she doesn't repeat the experience. She learns and grows.

Challenges, struggles, etc make us better people, and I believe in giving your child a lot of those.

That's a very different thing from violence. Violence is imposing your anger & frustration on another human being. The pain is actually the smallest part of it. The fear, rejection and humiliation of being hit by a parent are far stronger. That does nothing to build their character, it only teaches them to fear you.

Niccolo Machiavelli said it is better to be feared than loved, because you can control fear. He has a point, but he was giving advice on how to be a more effective tyrant. Is that what you think constitutes parenting?

The question is, do the negative feelings have to become a part of the experience? Can we separate the feelings and the physical act?

I think we can, and it can be the furthest thing from Machiavellianism. Appropriate physical punishment does not show anger, hatred, rage, viciousness or malice. You speak calmly, explain why it's happening, how it helps the child and how to avoid it again. The child will take it as difficult in the moment, but ultimately cooperate acknowledging it's for their own good.

Most importantly, once it's all over, return to being affectionate with them and make sure they know you care for them. If you can adequately communicate that you are on their team and have their best interests at heart, the negative feelings don't come into it.

It's too bad that the vast majority of people, like the father in that video don't mete out discipline like this. They are driven by emotions: the catharsis of meting our violence against the helpless. It's disgusting and in a sense unsurprising that people look at corporal punishment with such a bad taste in their mouth when it's represented by incidents such as these.

It's all about cognition in the end. If you accept and trust the other person, you will take the punishment willingly. The key is, they have to be treated justly.

 

[amateursurgeon]

The question is, do the negative feelings have to become a part of the experience? Can we separate the feelings and the physical act?

I think we can, and it can be the furthest thing from Machiavellianism. Appropriate physical punishment does not show anger, hatred, rage, viciousness or malice. You speak calmly, explain why it's happening, how it helps the child and how to avoid it again. The child will take it as difficult in the moment, but ultimately cooperate acknowledging it's for their own good.

Most importantly, once it's all over, return to being affectionate with them and make sure they know you care for them. If you can adequately communicate that you are on their team and have their best interests at heart, the negative feelings don't come into it.

It's too bad that the vast majority of people, like the father in that video don't mete out discipline like this. They are driven by emotions: the catharsis of meting our violence against the helpless. It's disgusting and in a sense unsurprising that people look at corporal punishment with such a bad taste in their mouth when it's represented by incidents such as these.

It's all about cognition in the end. If you accept and trust the other person, you will take the punishment willingly. The key is, they have to be treated justly.

If you're able to speak calmly and reasonably to a child, and they are in an emotional state to listen calmly and reasonably, you could just explain it to them instead.

 

[bobsoap]

Listen, lets say your able to establish this elusive "proper physical punishment" (and that's a big if) The question I would then ask is Why? Why are you so bound and determined to hit your child?

When you really think (yes think, not feel) it's just beyond logical.

I think that's the gist of it. There is a difference between making a child submit to your reasoning because you said so, and because it's better for them.

It's the WHY.

When you beat your child into submission, they will usually "get" that you don't want them to do whatever they did, and they won't do it again because of that. Until they've grown up and you can't hit them anymore because they now live in Vegas and star in adult movies.

When you acutally take the time to have a constructive discussion with your child instead, they will "get it" eventually as well, naturally. Plus they will know WHY what they did was wrong. They will actually learn something. The downside is that this route may take longer than beating the shit out of them. And we all know that you better grow up fast when you live in a trailer park. This route is not for everyone.

"Daddy says it's not right" on the one side.

"I understand why it's not right" on the other.

How do you want your child to grow up?

I've never been beaten as a child. I don't have children of my own yet. Just strong feelings about using violence to build a human intellect.