FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Smacking police interrogate Mother reprimanding kids in shop

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The War On Children, Marriage and the Family
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
fish5133
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 2557
Location: One breath from Glory

PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:33 am    Post subject: Smacking police interrogate Mother reprimanding kids in shop Reply with quote

Quote:
Mother trailed by policeman and warned by council for telling off son at checkout


A mother who reprimanded her children at a supermarket was secretly followed by an off-duty policeman and interrogated by fellow officers who reported her to social services.
The 34-year-old, who has had no previous problems with the police, was horrified when she was visited at home by two uniformed officers six weeks after the incident.
They said she had been seen by the off-duty officer who had trailed the family to their house – a 15-minute walk away – to get their address.

During the visit, the officers asked the mother what forms of discipline she imposed on her 11-year-old son and four-year-old daughter.
When she admitted she occasionally gave them a smack ‘as a last resort’, they advised her to stick to the alternative methods she already used, such as withdrawing treats and banning television.
She later received a letter from the local council informing her that the ‘chastisement’ of her children in public had been put ‘on record’.
The mother, who wishes to remain anonymous to protect her children, admits that on the day she took them to the supermarket in Southampton in early August they had been unusually badly behaved because bad weather had kept them indoors.

She admits she threatened her son in the store with a ‘hiding’ if he did not behave and had given him a mild smack earlier in the day for quarrelling with his sister.
But the mother, a regular churchgoer and a bookshop manager, whose 40-year-old husband was until recently a logistics controller at an international aerospace company, said that she smacked her children only ‘two or three times a year, if that’. She said her children had been running around the shop aisles, bickering and fighting with each other. When she reached the till, she made them sit on a bench but they started quarrelling again.
She said: ‘I went over to them, carrying my bags of shopping, and my words were something like, “How dare you behave like this – you’ve been arguing and fighting all day. If you carry on like this you’re going to get another hiding like the one you had earlier.”’
She admitted her language might have sounded harsh but said she had wanted her son to get the message she was really angry.
Her rebuke had the required effect because her children were later very apologetic. Towards the end of September, however, two policemen knocked at her door.
‘I have never been in trouble with the police before and I have a great respect for them, so I was absolutely shocked,’ she said.
‘When they told me about the off-duty officer, I couldn’t believe it.
‘He must have only seen the end part of a long day where they had played up and slid on the floors in the supermarket.’
During the conversation, the police warned her that, in some cases, they had the right to go into schools and talk to children directly, which she said was ‘intimidating’.
Two weeks later, in early October, a letter arrived from Southampton City Council’s Children’s Services Department. Though the letter said no further action would be taken ‘at this time’, it added: ‘We would like to advise you that we do keep the information on record.’ The woman said she felt she had been ‘treated like a criminal’.
Hampshire Police confirmed that an off-duty officer had reported the incident to its child protection team.
A spokesman said: ‘It was not an ordinary telling-off and because of what the woman said and the way her children reacted to it, it gave our officer reasonable grounds for concern. We followed this up, as you would expect any police force to do.’
A spokesman for Southampton City Council said the letter was ‘standard practice’, adding: ‘It is very important that we keep records of any concerns raised to us about children in the city.’
Under the law, mild smacking is allowable under a ‘reasonable chastisement’ defence against common assault. However, punishment that creates visible bruising, grazes, scratches and cuts can lead to action.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1226056/Mother-trailed-policem an-warned-council-telling-son-checkout.html?ITO=1490&referrer=yahoo#ix zz0WJkyeIRU
_________________
JO911B.
"for we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in high places " Eph.6 v 12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 16080
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I worked as a reporter in Southampton, and the council are about as anally retentive as you can get.
Quote:
Southampton council said writing to parents who are brought to its attention was 'standard practice', and that it was 'very important' to keep records of such incidents.
But the Reverend Mark Stocker, whose Spring Road Evangelical Church the mother attends, said: 'She is very upset because she feels it's criminalised her when she's just a loving mother who would never hurt her children. She's so shaken that someone actually followed her home.'
Mike Judge of the Christian Institute think-tank said: 'This woman is a personal friend - and I know she's a good mum. I don't think it's particularly a Christian issue, but we do believe in the family quite strongly, and get worried when the state tries to take over the role of parents.'
Mild smacking by parents is legal, but any punishment that leaves a mark can lead to court action.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 16080
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

here's the law Mr Spock
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/31/section/58

Study Claims That Children Who Are "Smacked" Do Better Later In Life
https://jezebel.com/5439153/study-claims-that-children-who-are-smacked -do-better-later-in-life

Hortense Smith
1/03/10 4:40pmFiled to: BRINGING UP BABY

According to a study led by Professor Marjorie Gunhoe of Calvin College, children who are physically disciplined between the ages of two and six end up being more successful and well-adjusted than peers who had never been "smacked."

Gunhoe's study, which took the lives of 2,600 subjects into account, including "detailed interviews with 179 teenagers" determined that children who were disciplined before the age of six tended to do better academically and have more "optimism about the future" than those who were not disciplined during the same developmental period. However, children who were physically disciplined between the ages of seven and eleven were still more likely to be academically more successful, though they showed more negative behavioral traits.

Gunhoe argues that her research proves that parents should not be banned from physically disciplining their children: "The claims made for not spanking children fail to hold up. They are not consistent with the data. I think of spanking as a dangerous tool, but there are times when there is a job big enough for a dangerous tool. You just don't use it for all your jobs." Debates are currently raging in the comment sections of both the Times of London and Daily Mail pieces on the study, as readers attempt to defend or dismantle Gunhoe's work, and, perhaps most interestingly, attempt to clarify the difference between a "smack" and physical abuse.

It's not entirely surprising, I suppose, that Gunhoe's study is already kicking up a great deal of debate: as the Daily Mail notes, "in a recent poll, more than 70% of Britons said they would support children's charities in imposing a ban on hitting of any kind as a form of discipline," and one imagines it will be hard to convince parents who do not agree with physically disciplining their their children to change their minds, no matter what the statistics might say, as evidenced by a comment by British "parenting guru" Penelope Leach, who tells Georgia Warren of the Times of London, "I do not buy this idea that children will learn positive behaviour from being smacked. The law says adults hitting adults is wrong and children should be protected in the same way. Children are people, too."


Young children who are smacked 'go on to be more successful'
By DANIEL MARTIN FOR THE DAILY MAIL UPDATED: 08:55, 4 January 2010
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1240279/Children-smacked-young -likely-successful-study-finds.html

Disciplined: Children who have been physically admonished at a young age performed better on all counts

Young children who are smacked by their parents grow up to be happier and more successful than those who have never been hit, research claims.

It found that children who are smacked before the age of six perform better at school when they are teenagers.

They are also more likely to do voluntary work and to want to go to university than those who have never been physically disciplined.

But the study also revealed that children who are smacked after the age of six were more likely to exhibit behavioural problems, such as being involved in fights.

Smacking is currently banned in 20 European countries, including Germany, Spain and the Netherlands.

In Britain 'reasonable chastisement' in the home is allowed unless it leaves a mark.

But the study, by Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of Psychology at Calvin College in the U.S. state of Michigan, found there was not enough evidence to prove that smacking harmed most children.

She said: 'The claims that are made for not spanking children fail to hold up.

'I think of spanking as a dangerous-tool, but then there are times when there is a job big enough for a dangerous tool. You don't use it for all your jobs.'

Professor Gunnoe questioned 2,600 people about being smacked, of whom a quarter had never been physically chastised.

The participants' answers then were compared with their behaviour, such as academic success, optimism about the future, antisocial behaviour, violence and bouts of depression.

Teenagers in the survey who had been smacked only between the ages of two and six performed best on all the positive measures.

Those who had been smacked between seven and 11 fared worse on negative behaviour but were more likely to be academically successful. Teenagers who were still smacked fared worst on all counts.

Parenting guru Penelope Leach disagreed with the findings.

'No good can come from hitting a child,' she said. 'I do not buy this idea that children will learn positive behaviour from being smacked.

'The law says adults hitting adults is wrong and children should be protected in the same way. Children are people too.'

But psychologist Aric Sigman said: 'The idea smacking and violence are on a continuum is a bizarre and fetished view of what punishment is for most parents.

'If it's done judiciously by a parent who is normally affectionate and sensitive to their child, our society should not be up in arms about that. Parents should be taught to distinguish this from a punch in the face.'

Two years ago, Britain was criticised by the UN for failing to ban smacking in the home, after experts said it was a form of abuse.

And growing numbers of the public seem to agree: A recent poll found 71 per cent of parents would support a ban on smacking.







Smacked children more successful later in life, study finds
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/6926823/Smacked-children- more-successful-later-in-life-study-finds.html

Children who are smacked by their parents may grow up to be happier and more successful than those spared physical discipline, research suggests.
Children should be provided with the same protection against physical assault as adults.
Photo: IAN JONES
Murray Wardop By Murray Wardrop1:26PM GMT 03 Jan 2010
A study found that youngsters smacked up to the age of six did better at school and were more optimistic about their lives than those never hit by their parents.
They were also more likely to undertake voluntary work and keener to attend university, experts discovered.
The research, conducted in the United States, is likely to anger children’s rights campaigners who have unsuccessfully fought to ban smacking in Britain.
Currently, parents are allowed by law to mete out "reasonable chastisement'' on their children, providing smacking does not leave a mark or bruise. These limits were clarified in the 2004 Children’s Act.
But children’s groups and MPs have argued that spanking is an outdated form of punishment that can cause long-term mental health problems.
“While anything more than a light tap is definitely wrong, parents should be allowed the freedom to discipline their children without the fear that they will be reported to police"
Margaret Morrissey
Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of psychology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, said her study showed there was insufficient evidence to deny parents the freedom to determine how their children should be punished.
She said: “The claims made for not spanking children fail to hold up. They are not consistent with the data.
“I think of spanking as a dangerous tool, but there are times when there is a job big enough for a dangerous tool. You just don’t use it for all your jobs.”
The research questioned 179 teenagers about how often they were smacked as children and how old they were when they were last spanked.

Their answers were then compared with information they gave about their behaviour that could have been affected by smacking. This included negative effects such as anti-social behaviour, early sexual activity, violence and depression, as well as positives such as academic success and ambitions.
Those who had been smacked up to the age of six performed better in almost all the positive categories and no worse in the negatives than those never punished physically.
Teenagers who had been hit by their parents from age seven to 11 were also found to be more successful at school than those not smacked but fared less well on some negative measures, such as getting involved in more fights.
• Smacking children is a decision for parents
However, youngsters who claimed they were still being smacked scored worse than every other group across all the categories.
Prof Gunnoe found little difference in the results between sexes and different racial groups.
“If it’s done judiciously by a parent who is normally affectionate and sensitive to their child, our society should not be up in arms about that. Parents should be trusted to distinguish this from a punch in the face.”
Aric Sigman
The findings were rejected by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which has fought to ban smacking.
A spokesman for the charity said: "The NSPCC believes that children should have the same legal protection from assault as adults do.
“Other research has shown that smacking young children affects their behaviour and mental development, and makes them more likely to be anti-social.”
• Smacking makes children naughtier: research
However, Parents Outloud, the pressure group, welcomed the research, saying parents should not be criminalised for mild smacking.
Its spokeswoman, Margaret Morrissey, said: “It is very difficult to explain verbally to a young child why something they have done is wrong.
“A light tap is often the most effective way of teaching them not to do something that is dangerous or hurtful to other people – it is a preventive measure.

“While anything more than a light tap is definitely wrong, parents should be allowed the freedom to discipline their children without the fear that they will be reported to police.”
Aric Sigman, a psychologist and author of The Spoilt Generation: Why Restoring Authority will Make our Children and Society Happier, told the Sunday Times: “The idea that smacking and violence are on a continuum is a bizarre and fetishised view of what punishment or smacking is for most parents.
“If it’s done judiciously by a parent who is normally affectionate and sensitive to their child, our society should not be up in arms about that. Parents should be trusted to distinguish this from a punch in the face.”
Previous studies have suggested that smacking children can lead them to develop behavioural problems such as being more aggressive.
• British parents should be banned from smacking, United Nations report says
• Smacking never right, say doctors

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The War On Children, Marriage and the Family All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group