It's about damn time...

steveinaz

As far as this "nobody is touching my kid" camp, if business is being taken care of at home, you'll never be faced with the issue to begin with right? In my school district, it was pretty much a last resort thing, which was an offense that didn't really warrant suspending a student. It was witnessed, and parents were notified. If parents were in disagreement, the kid was suspended from school, effective immediately, and parents had to come pick them up. I'd guess 99 out of 100 parents probably said, "give'm the swats"....

I like the suspension policy for those who don't want the school disciplining their kid---Fine, mom & dad, you take care of it---he's yours for the next 5 days. AMEN.

IT IS NOT OUR SCHOOLS RESPONSIBILITY TO TEACH YOUR CHILD GOOD MANNERS AND BEHAVIOR, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY.

John30_30

F1nut wrote: »

Nothing says fail quite like blaming his shop teacher for his own shortcomings as a man.

His shortcomings as a man? Well that's a curious way of looking at it.
He was 18 when he did it, so he had nothing but shortcomings. He never did become a man as we commonly view manhood, and you could argue he was painted into that corner by the **** life he did have.

He sat next to me in 4th grade. I was the class brain, and that teacher thought I could do no wrong, but I also recall he treated Jimmy like a dummy. Once or twice when he didn't get something, he'd turn around and ask me to explain stuff, but mostly he kept to himself that he was pretty clueless.

He murdered a guy whom nobody, (with the possible exception of the man's wife, an English teacher whom he almost certainly also bullied) cried over losing.
The shop teacher was also a talented minor league bb player. Physically, a big guy. In fact, he might have been a major league prospect once upon a time.
As I recall, he never singled me out personally for arbitrary punishment, except there was one episode he put me on the spot for. About a week into the term, for reasons I forget, he had me stand up and call the names of the rest of the class by memory. I knew about half the guys. He said if I forgot or didn't know anyone's name, everyone would get a swat. So the class were sweating it. As it happened, I got all the names right. It was a joke to him to have that power to inflict punishment and pain.

I was just average in shop, had no great desire to make things with my hands, so it's the mystery of my life that I ended up going into construction and becoming a craftsman. I can swear on a Bible that that had nothing to do with my adventures in 8th grade shop.


Another kid, who was already man-sized by 8th grade, took the very dubious notion to build a paddle for his woodworking project. Yeah, bad idea. Predictably enough, the teacher tested him by breaking it on his ****, then telling him he'd get a D because it broke.
We witnessed it. Curtis had real tears in his eyes. It would have been funny, except you can't make this stuff up, and he was in real pain.

The killer, if it was him, was a kid who had been labeled a "slow learner" from early on, probably dyslexic and some other variation of learning-disabled. I do recall him being made fun of by other teachers and kids for that.
He was held back a year, and the murder was the year after I graduated.
We had some very mean white-trash bullies in that school. He was never one of those, but he wouldn't take crap either.

There were guys that age going off to Vietnam to kill dozens of perfect strangers, mostly civilians minding their own business- because their government and military told them it was a good thing if you loved your country. Hell, everyone loved their country.
Johnny H. was one of the tough kids, went into the Marines and did 2 tours in Vietnam. Maybe even a lifer. I'm pretty sure never had a family either, and he died last year of cancer, before the 40th class reunion. I don't know how it ties together.

mdaudioguy

Too many kids have it way too tough, no doubt about that. We all have the equipment to make children, but unfortunately, not everyone has the propensity to care for them as they should.

reeltrouble1

well one thing is for sure, the little boogers will be running things in about 15 years give or take.

So as you see ShackDaddy is in fact responsible for adding to the educated woman factor...........

from barefoot and pregnant to educated and high-browed......oh well, good job man, I think though I am going to punch my daughters pea-brained BF in the head for the crap I am sure he thinks about her, GAWD what if he wants to spank......nevermind, cant even bear the thought.......

sorry, but nobody hits Daddy's little girl, ever.

RT1

arun1963

shack wrote: »

A parent should "probably" have the right to paddle their own kid....BUT NO ONE ELSE. In practice I really think that parents should avoid spanking...as they too can accidently do physical harm to a child...even if they don't mean to. Disipline your children...don't beat them. How can one tell their daughters that ANY physical agression to them should never be tolerated and then spank/paddle them? Ok for daddy...but not ok for the boyfriend? Definitely mixed messages.

+1 to what Steve said. Yes parents should have the right to paddle, but the challenge is in getting the job done, without exercising that right. Kids learn 80% of traits and habits in the first 8 years or so. Parents and the home environment are the biggest influences. For all the things you want to wallop your kids for, chances are you yourself may be doing the same things without realising it. The kid is just copying you. Walking the talk is the biggest challenge. Spend quality time with them, relate to them and work your **** off on being a good role model.

That said kids are kids and they will constantly push the envelope. You don't need to spank them to draw the line. Basic discipline like grounding, no pocket money even yelling at times will do. My son is 19 and the daughter is 8. Never laid a hand on them and if some else did..........."Somebodies gonna get a hurt real bad!"

MacLeod wrote: »

Ya gotta beat yo kids!

Nah, you prolly feel guilty after swatting a fly. You couldn't lay a hand on your kids.

DSkip wrote: »

Just because it worked for past generations doesn't mean it will work for future generations. It worked with past generations because there was discipline AT HOME to supplement.

One thing I have learned through my experiences is that a great way to reach out to the youth is to show a genuine interest in their life and prove to them that you care about them....... Then, in return, when I expected something of them, they knew it and would do what I expected because of the respect I gave them.

The student demographics have changed drastically over the last 50 years. Unfortunately, we still use a system that has remained essentially unchanged since the 1920's. Coupled with the lack of discipline at home, teachers are fighting an uphill battle with or without physical punishment.

A smart young man and a great father to be.

BIZILL

i got beat, well, paddled when i was in kindergarten. i learned from it. the paddle was flat with 1" holes drilled into it. i'm not certain if that was to make it aerodynamic and to pick up speed or just something to remind you of what happened earlier that day when you look into the mirror and see them circles.

i am almost all for this, but thinking back, that teacher was about 4'7" and weighed 'bout 230 lbs. it wasn't bad, but what if in her haste she palmed that paddle wrong and hit a kid with the thin edge versus the blunt flat side... and a bony kid such as i was back then, well, wood making direct contact with bone...let's just say, "OUCH".

then someone will find a way to sue the entire school district for mewions of dollas.

hearingimpared

I think some of you fellas get too cerebral when it comes to kids. Sometimes a good swat on the heiney out-of-the-blue when a child gets out of hand speaks volumes more than words.

I think a swat on the butt in the disiplinarian's office gets the message across just fine. This of course assumes that the parents are in complete agreement with the school administration such as the issue that started this debate. As long as the kid isn't humiliated in front of his classmates which I do think can be detrimental.

When I was in first grade in parochial school I did something but I can't remember the infraction. The nun made me go down to the kindergarten class and get my sister. When she arrived back into my class with me, the nun, with my sister standing there in front of the class, put me across her knee and gave me a good spanking. I was much more hurt by the humiliation than anything. When I got home I was very upset and when my sister told my mom (who was a master of corporal punishment) she saw how upset I was and consoled me THAT TIME because she saw how the humiliation affected me. I never forgot that and that humiliation did scar my little six year old brain which I felt for a long, long time. She protested that incident to the "Mother Superior" of the school that time only. Any other time, I got a second beating when I got home.

In most cases when I got in trouble in school, which I did quite frequently, and got caught (very rarely) the beating I got from my mom when I got home was imminent.

My dad, who was a school teacher, never hit us, he would take us (me mainly because I was a little hood) into his room and speak very calmly about the situation and discuss in a logical manner the error of my ways. I can tell you this, I would take a beating from my mother any day of the week and twice on Sunday than to face my father's logic and lecture which hurt much much more because I knew I disappointed him.

When I raised my older boy, I rarely hit him. It was mostly a smack on the hand or the butt right at the time of the infraction depending on his age and he'd never do what it was that he did again. My younger son, who has ADHD who kept repeating the same stupid behavior would get his little skinny heiney reddened before he would get the message. Different child different approach.

What has all this to do with the topic at hand? I feel that if it is agreed by the parents and approved by the school board, the long march to the diciplinarian's office for a swat or two is just fine depending on childs disposition and track record. NO HUMILIATION! That is what I feel damages a kids emotional well being.

As far as the mixed messages, confusing a kid on right and wrong, well, if it is clearly noted that there is a difference between being a bully or always being ready to use violence to solve their issues with people vs. the swat on the butt being dicipline there is no problem there IMHO. That should also be the order of the day for corporal dicipline by a designated school disiplanarian.

I would like to see them bring back morning, afternoon and Satuday detentions. This deprives the kid of his fun and I believe is an effective tool for dicipline. Suspensions from school are useless in the minor cases IMHO as it causes the child to loose education time. For major infractions (e.g., fighting, bullying, smoking on school grounds etc) a suspension that is followed up and enforced at home as a suspension of priveldges too is a good thing.

engtaz

Life is not fair and unless the kids today are shown that all things have consequences, we are in big trouble. I love the phrase, in the day, dean would give you the paddle if you step out of line. Now we just tell them to stop being bad. Since when did verbal threats work on the streets. Life does not work that way. Put your finger in the fire and you get burned. CONSEQUENCES

hearingimpared

engtaz wrote: »

Life is not fair and unless the kids today are shown that all things have consequences, we are in big trouble. I love the phrase, in the day, dean would give you the paddle if you step out of line. Now we just tell them to stop being bad. Since when did verbal threats work on the streets. Life does not work that way. Put your finger in the fire and you get burned. CONSEQUENCES

Excellent point Roy! But I have to go one step further, CONSEQUENCES that are distubing to the offender not just a slap on the wrist.