OHbaby! Forums : Sue Bradford resigned

Sue Bradford resigned : Sheza wrote: Babe wrote: ...

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:57:46 +0000

Author: kiwigal
Subject: 28984
Posted: 05�October�2009 at 9:57pm

Sheza wrote:

Babe wrote:

freckle wrote:

Babe- it's seems unusual to me that you teach Jake not to hurt others by smacking him! How confusing...

Oh for petes sake!!! ***banging my head against a brick bloody wall*** SPANKING IS A FRICKING CONSEQUENCE TO BAD BEHAVIOUR!!!!!! IT IS NOT HITTING!!!!
My parents and MANY MANY other parents of previous generations have spanked their children yet I AND the majority of other children brought up with a spank KNEW NOT TO HIT!!!! Theres a huge bloody difference!!!!

**calming breaths** ***wooosaaaaaaaaaaa (for anyone whos ever watched Bad Boys)***

Freckle that was a reaction to your comment but please don't take offence as it was not directed at you specifically. It does seem that no matter what pro-spankers say, anti-spankers are determined to not just accept a spank as A FORM OF DISCIPLINE! If you weren't spanked then maybe you really just can't get the difference!

I'm out anyway. This is stupid. I would like to point out that by saying spanking is abuse or violent then you are labelling alot of parents and grandparents who have done and are doing an awesome job.

I agree with babe,

My mum and dad smaked us as kids, and we knew not to hit anyone, we knew that when we were naughty we got a smack on the bum, but if another kid pissed us off or whatever, none of us ever hit them.
Neither myself or my three brothers have ever hit anyone, we all grew up knowing what was right and wrong.

A smack on the ass never did me no harm!!!!! Thats all I have to say on the topic.

I agree a spank a bottom is disciplining for bad behaviour not abusing them.

Sue Bradford resigned : sounds like me emz - I have boxes...

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 13:23:08 +0000

Author: freckle
Subject: 28984
Posted: 05�October�2009 at 1:23pm

sounds like me emz - I have boxes and boxes of articles that I plan to sort one day ... if you do come across them at some stage I'd be keen to have the refs but don't worry if it's a mission you must be pretty busy with your wee ones!!

Sue Bradford resigned : freckle, have to find my book...

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:30:51 +0000

Author: emz
Subject: 28984
Posted: 05�October�2009 at 12:30pm

freckle, have to find my book of readings I have so may take a while (you should see my garage full of teaching crap!). But when I find them, I'll post them up or send you a PM so I don't keep bumping the thread up lol

Sue Bradford resigned : LOL that was a very frustrated...

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:36:04 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 05�October�2009 at 8:36am

LOL that was a very frustrated post wasn't it....

Sue Bradford resigned : Babe wrote: freckle wrote:Babe-...

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:25:02 +0000

Author: Shezamumof3
Subject: 28984
Posted: 05�October�2009 at 1:25am

Babe wrote:

freckle wrote:

Babe- it's seems unusual to me that you teach Jake not to hurt others by smacking him! How confusing...

Sue Bradford resigned : emz wrote:It's not that...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:24:47 +0000

Author: freckle
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 5:24pm

emz wrote:

It's not *that* bad

I've done a lot of research on the topic, mostly when I was in college, before I had kids and had an experienced opinion in the matter. While I found freckle's summary of research interesting to read, I just wanted to say that it's obviously very biased towards the 'anti-smacking' camp (as you would expect as she is of that opinion, and that's fine). It would be nice to have links to research online that gives good points either way. I only have hard copies of my research, that had a lot of interesting points for/against corporal punishment, but can't find them published in any online journals or papers sorry.

Most of the info was from a meta analysis of research on the topic - therefore, it would have been pretty unethical for them to only use studies that were anti-corporal punishment. The findings did suggest that corporal punishment can work in the short-term but doesn't bring about long-term changes in behaviour... so wasn't completely negative I have done a few quick searches on the university databases for recent research on corporal punishment both for and against as I definitely would have included any research I found supporting it as well, despite the fact that I don't agree with it It is a hard one to research I guess and much of it has been done retrospectively due to ethical issues. I'd be interesting in reading the articles you have if you wouldn't mind posting the references?

I too think it's great that this sensitive topic has been able to be debated on a whole very calmly! I have found it really interesting hearing everyones view points...

Edited by freckle

Sue Bradford resigned : I think it speaks highly of the...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:19:28 +0000

Author: kellie
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 4:19pm

I think it speaks highly of the maturity of posters on here to debate such a sensitive topic without it getting really horrible.

Sue Bradford resigned : I thought it has been pretty tame...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:17:22 +0000

Author: Rachael21
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 4:17pm

I thought it has been pretty tame and respectful to be fair. It hasn't got too personal and all sides have put a pretty good argument forward. We are never going to agree but I like reading what people have to say.

Sue Bradford resigned : It's not that bad I've...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:12:28 +0000

Author: emz
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 4:12pm

It's not *that* bad

I've done a lot of research on the topic, mostly when I was in college, before I had kids and had an experienced opinion in the matter. While I found freckle's summary of research interesting to read, I just wanted to say that it's obviously very biased towards the 'anti-smacking' camp (as you would expect as she is of that opinion, and that's fine). It would be nice to have links to research online that gives good points either way. I only have hard copies of my research, that had a lot of interesting points for/against corporal punishment, but can't find them published in any online journals or papers sorry.

As for the rest of it, I'm not even going to bother commenting on any of it anymore as there have been some personal attacks about 'abusers' and I prefer for it not to go further.

But I will say.. Jess, I like you You've always been a huge help to me with TTC etc and I appreciate your posts

Sue Bradford resigned : I didn't think this thread...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:07:05 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 4:07pm

I didn't think this thread had got anywhere near bad enough to be locked or deleted
I also thought that except for maybe the odd comment here and there that on the whole everyone has been pretty nice.

I personally am happy to debate and to have my ideas and opinions questioned. I've learnt lots of new things from this debate. I still won't be smacking here but I have a greater understanding of where parents who do are coming from. It's also made me think about the disciplines I do use, like time out etc and what there effect may or may not be.

Sue Bradford resigned : well ive been avoiding this thread...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:55:14 +0000

Author: Candkids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 3:55pm

well ive been avoiding this thread like the plague but by 20pages!!!!

its a sensitive topic and everyone is entitled to their opinion, just as everyone is entitled to have their own way of parenting that works for them. children cant be put into the same category & diferent ways of discipline work for different kids just as children all learn differently in school, and i say shame on any parent who is going to crittisize another parent who is just trying to raise their kids how they see moral & to be good human beings and everyones opinion of that is different too, but we are all parents who have kids that we love so there is something we all have in common.

Edited by CatzKids

Sue Bradford resigned : Jeepers anyone would think you...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:37:29 +0000

Author: BuzzyBee
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 3:37pm

Jeepers anyone would think you guys didn't have kids to tend to/look after ...20 pages gosh *tongue in cheek*

Sue Bradford resigned : My friend was murdered, I could...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:41:53 +0000

Author: caitlynsmygirl
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 2:41pm

My friend was murdered, I could happily sit and watch his killer's death , but then I think , that would make me as bad as his killer , and Im not, so he can serve his (pathetic ) 18 years in jail ,and hopefully he will hate every minute of it .

Edited by caitlynsmygirl

Sue Bradford resigned : Jezsika wrote: Correct me all...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:38:40 +0000

Author: caitlynsmygirl
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 2:38pm

Jezsika wrote:

Correct me all you want i really couldnt care, im not liked by many on this forum and i STILL really dont care, and im not gonna let peoples opinions on ANYTHING change how i intend to raise my kids.
Im a single parent and think im doing a freaking fantastic job going alone.

Retort all you want but chances are i just wont read them.

Goodday!

Well I hope you read this reply ! I like you ! i've always liked you , and i've always enjoyed your posts

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy wrote: cuppatea wrote:Yes...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 12:30:17 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 12:30pm

Bizzy wrote:

cuppatea wrote:

Yes I totally agree that judges should not be that stupid, but lots of them are,

to me this is another reason against the death penalty.

Good point

Sue Bradford resigned : cuppatea wrote:Yes I totally...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:58:31 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 11:58am

cuppatea wrote:

Yes I totally agree that judges should not be that stupid, but lots of them are,

to me this is another reason against the death penalty.

Sue Bradford resigned : twinboys 2b you have the quote...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:54:20 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 11:54am

twinboys 2b you have the quote thing wrong, it was me not jess who said it...

i was refering to another post that did mention the smaking of dogs thing, i realise not everyone uses smacks for dogs as well...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy wrote:...and i know too...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:48:09 +0000

Author: Twinboys2b
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 11:48am

Bizzy wrote:

...and i know too that when training dogs (and lets face it kids are a bit like naughty little puppies) that they recommend you dont smack after the fact as there is then no relevance to the naughty behaviour

ETA - opps Bizzy wrote sorry

Couldn't resist, there are many dog training methods where you don't smack the dog, actually I think the majority don't smack dogs.... hmmmm

Couldn't help myself

Edited by Twinboys2b

Sue Bradford resigned : Jezsika wrote:it really DOESNT...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:41:03 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 11:41am

Jezsika wrote:

it really DOESNT matter how u discipline your child nothing is gonna be right in anyones eyes.

your right, cept i think it shoulb be everyones eyes. i think someone pointed out before that there is always going to be someone who disagrees with most parenting choices we make... i think the smacking debate tho is a bit more complicated because of the repeal of section 59 being labelled as an anti- smacking law. and once again peoples perceptions of smack/spank and what that entails to them.

I was thinking too i wonder what the kids really do think. several people from both sides of the argument have said that their child knows why etc and i couldnt help but wish (and not for the first time either) that i could get inside my kids head and see what they see and understand how they do!

I know that the removal of yourself as a parent - as per diane levy and other time out methods - is supposed to be a psychological tool in our parenting methods... and do we really want to mess the minds of our kids?

and i know too that when training dogs (and lets face it kids are a bit like naughty little puppies) that they recommend you dont smack after the fact as there is then no relevance to the naughty behaviour.... once again playing with their minds?

tricky things are kids and i dont know how many times i wish they had an adults understanding, or maybe i should have a kids understanding!

anyway - i have the flu and am so blocked up i think it is affecting my thinking...

oh and thanks bobbie for coming to my defence... i was a bit confused by JD's perceived contradiction.

Edited by Bizzy

Sue Bradford resigned : Sorry JD it did sound like you...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 10:33:11 +0000

Author: Bobbie
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 10:33am

Sorry JD it did sound like you were singling her out which is why I responded that way. Shouldn't have jumped on you though - you're right.

I was raised in a very non-religious household. My Dad was sent to a Catholic boarding school in England from 4 - 18 and so absolutely rejected the faith. So I didn't 'come into' religion until I married into a Catholic family.

And I can tell you as someone who hasn't been raised with that stuff every day - the bible does come across as pretty weird especially juxtaposed with today's lifestyles.

And because when I started asking questions about it a lot of Christians attacked me rather than explaining their view points:
a) I can understand why Bizzy was questioning the stuff and suprised about it
and b) I felt like she was being attacked.

Sue Bradford resigned : I like you Jezsika you make good...

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 09:32:16 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 02�October�2009 at 9:32am

I like you Jezsika you make good points too.

LMAO WRX yes well now I've read your post I DO have a few things to say!!! NAMELY THAT PEOPLE MOVERS ARE THE MOST UGLY VEHICLES IN THE WORLD hahahaha... though I've smiled a few times at the picture of all the guys leaning out of it with their rifles while barrelling along after a deer LMAO the poor deer would probably be thinking it was gonna be snapped by aliens and experimented on hahahaha....

Weegee ur post was great and its so true about the whole rod thing. Haha WRX said she'd spank while calmly angry first so I'm not the only one but maybe a better word is annoyed?

I actually appreciated Bizzy bringing up the verses because it made me think about how I tie them into my disciplining being a christian (albeit not a very well-behaved one at times ). Lots of people have weird impressions of christians but that is often more to do with how we (christians in general) portray ourselves (not in the best light alot of the time) and the Bible and God end up getting flack. Anyway thats just a side thought that I was just thinking and typed out

Arrgh speaking of little horrors I have to be out of the house like NOW and Jake has decided to shut himself in his room (with abit of help!!!) and scream hysterically so I have to go sort him out. Hopefully he's been left long enough to calm down by himself...

Sue Bradford resigned : Im not insinuation anything.Its...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:23:16 +0000

Author: JD
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 11:23pm

Im not insinuation anything. Its too hard to have this conversation over a forum as you cant hear my tone or anything.
I never meant to offend others....just stick up for myself and offer my 2c.
I did say it "sounds" like, which was my way of trying to explain how it was coming accross to me.

Anyway, not gonna argue...

Im not judging any of you...in fact I have never met any of you so it would be silly to judge someone based on cyber conversations!

There are alot of things on this forum that I don't agree with, but I do find it interesting to read other peoples opinions and find out the reasons for their choices...sometimes it has changed the way I think.... I didn't expect to be jumped on for my comments and opinions.

Sue Bradford resigned : JD wrote: Bizzy - it sounds...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:56:48 +0000

Author: Bobbie
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:56pm

JD wrote:

Bizzy - it sounds like you picture Christians as complete weirdo's who take everything the bible says literally...which to me is a wee bit ignorant.

From where I was sitting Bizzy was commenting on the Bible passage not the Christians - and she said she came from a non-religious background so remember that would be new to her.

I hope you aren't insinuating that she is ignorant because of her comment - that would be grossly unfair and funnily enough - judgemental.

Sue Bradford resigned : nah, I just like arguing

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:42:35 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:42pm

nah, I just like arguing

Sue Bradford resigned : yeah yeee yah ! twenty pages !!!...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:40:52 +0000

Author: caitlynsmygirl
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:40pm

yeah yeee yah ! twenty pages !!!

...so I take it the smacking debate is something people feel strongly about ?

Sue Bradford resigned : Ah good old Bon Jovi, wonder were...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:21:37 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:21pm

Ah good old Bon Jovi, wonder were he stands on the whole smacking debate!

Yes I totally agree that judges should not be that stupid, but lots of them are, which apparent with a lot of sentences that get handed out. Clearer legislation gives better guidance to those in the justice system and leaves things less open to interpretation (although I still think they could have worded it better than they did). I always wonder why it takes 12 people decide if someone is innocent or guilty and only 1 person to decide how much punishment, seems strange to me.

I don't think that people's parents were abusive when they smacked, it was the done thing then, same as drink driving (I am not comparing the two that was more in jest by the way).

By the way Spencer is by no means an angel, in fact some days I swear he is the devil incarnate, or that he is at least possessed by something unsavoury.

I do agree with the death penalty, for some people I would gladly bring back public hanging and would be front row with my popcorn.

Sue Bradford resigned : LOL.. would you believe I was...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:19:28 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:19pm

LOL.. would you believe I was trying to sing that song along to my dancing, but can't seem to get it to match!

Sue Bradford resigned : This is by no means, meant to...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:08:58 +0000

Author: caitlynsmygirl
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:08pm

This is by no means, meant to stop the debate, please , if you're enjoying the argument , continue
BUT , Ive got Pepsi up there like , all waiting to dance and stuff , and I liked Fats post, cos I like the way she writes , so im interrupting to say (or sing )

.........Tommy used to work on the docks
union's been on strike

He's down on his luck - It's tough
so tough.
Gina works the diner all day
working for her man

She brings home her pay for love
for love.

She says: We've got to hold on to what we've got
'Cause it doesn't make a difference if we make it or not.
We've got each other and that's a lot for love -
We'll give it a shot.!

We're half way there - Livin' on a prayer!

Take my hand and we'll make it
I swear! - whoa oh , livin' on a prayer.

Tommy got his six string in hock.
Now he's holding in what he used to make it talk -
So tough
it's tough.
Gina dreams of running away
when she cries in the night
Tommy whispers: Baby
it's okay
someday.

We've got to hold on to what we've got . . .
We're half way there - Livin' on a prayer
. . .

We've got to hold on ready or not

You live for the fight when it's all that you've got.

We're half way there - Livin' on a prayer
. . .
We're half way there - Livin' on a prayer
. . .
We're half way there - Livin' on a prayer...

Right , as you were .

. . .

Sue Bradford resigned : WRXandJosh wrote:Um i dont...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:02:48 +0000

Author: LittleBug
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 10:02pm

WRXandJosh wrote:

Um i dont think that law closed up any loop hole as in the end it is up to a judge who surely if a child was being horse whipped would have ruled it was unnecessary. I dont think a law change was required more likely the judges who let a parent get off with that need to re-evaluate their idea of reasonable force.

I agree... I don't think there was a "loop-hole", if a judge didn't deem physical harm as abuse then he should be held responsible, rather than making little controversial law changes that don't solve the problem.

*just a wee note... as a Christian I don't agree with the death penalty either, for biblical reasons. But that's a whole different kettle of fish

Sue Bradford resigned : *waiting for babe to comment on...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:59:24 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:59pm

*waiting for babe to comment on my awesome people mover certainly had a few comments about it when i met her hahaha*

Sue Bradford resigned : Babe you are obviously a stronger...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:56:20 +0000

Author: weegee
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:56pm

Babe you are obviously a stronger woman than me because I can't be "calmly angry", for me it's all or nothing, I'm angry or I'm not and when I am angry, I really do need time out. Good for you!

Sue Bradford resigned : I totally wasn't going to...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:54:05 +0000

Author: weegee
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:54pm

I totally wasn't going to come back in here, but lo and behold if one of the blogs I follow didn't have two posts on the subject today. I won't copy it across wholesale (although the links are here and here for those interested) but there was one point I wanted to put here as it fits neatly into the current state of the conversation:

Peaceful Parenting wrote:

the Biblical reference about Spare the rod, spoil the child [is misunderstood]. The "Rod" was used by the shepherd to guide his sheep, not to beat them. Consider the phrase in the 23d Psalm "Thy Rod and Thy staff, they comfort me..." For children, there is comfort in the guidance given to them by their parents or guardians.

Pretty much anything else I had thought of saying, other people have now said so I can't contribute to the debate really. Just wanted to add that despite the fact you can put me in the non-smacking camp (for exactly the same reason as lilfatty - I don't want to lash out in anger, but don't think I could bring myself to smack if not in anger iygwim) I don't think parents who choose to smack are necessarily abusing their children.

I think it'd be fair to say that anybody who's contributed to this debate on here has made an effort to inform themselves and has thought about it and aren't the 'targets' of 'anti smacking' legislation. So I hope nobody here feels picked on! (Although perhaps a couple of posters have not chosen their words wisely, I don't think they were intending to offend anyone.)

I think the point of the repeal of section 59 is not to make criminals of ordinary parents, or even to make sure abusers get put in jail, but it's more about changing the culture of acceptability of violence towards children for corrective purposes. It won't happen overnight - perhaps not even in our lifetimes - but I think this is a step on the right path. So despite the nanny state overtones I do agree with the law as it stands.

Oh, there was something else I wanted to add - for those who choose to administer a light smack - I think the perception of those who choose not to, and I'm not saying that perception is correct, it's just a way of thinking - is that smacking is perhaps an 'easier'/'lazier' form of discipline? That other methods of discipline require a bit more forethought/planning? Which is where they might be coming from when they might accidentally say something like "better" parenting forms in relation to alternative forms of discipline? Perhaps if they thought that smacking can come from a similar philosophy, requiring forethought etc (which I can understand it might), that perception could change. Just my 2 cents

Sue Bradford resigned : haha i drive a people mover (not...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:51:45 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:51pm

haha i drive a people mover (not buy choice and hopefully not too much longer) and as much as i hate the ugly ass thing i might actually miss that people under estimate it. We get some interesting looks in the people mover passing people with the drag car on the trailer. It has surprisingly a lot of grunt and is an awesome shooting wagon with its swivel side seat and moon roof big enough to 2 i just wish it wasnt so ugly.

Willful now thats a better word to describe Josh. A lot of people have been surprised but his strong mindedness in his ability to distract you or make you think he is distracted then as soon as you think you have won and he is over his naughty behavior he is sneaking quietly back to finish what he was doing.

Sue Bradford resigned : Farttartsrock awesomely said!!!!...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:50:15 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:50pm

Farttartsrock awesomely said!!!!

Sue Bradford resigned : Haha oh that was me who put the...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:48:30 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:48pm

Haha oh that was me who put the definition of spanking instead of smacking coz thats what I've always called it

I wouldn't wait to calm down then smack Jake either, not at this age anyway. ETA AGAIN: I mean like leave him in his room til I'm calm then spank him... (sorry waaaay past my bedtime!!) Don't know what I'll do when hes older obviously because we haven't got there yet.

I do have to adjust what I've said earlier because WRX is right - I don't spank Jake when I'm 'lashing out' angry but if I'm calmly angry and know I won't use more force than normal then I will spank because I think showing controlled emotion is healthy and teaches your children self-control. ( Of course if you don't agree please let it go coz otherwise we'll set off another round of debate!!!).

Emphatically no to bringing back the death penalty here and agreed it is hyprocritical to use the bible to make one behaviour ok then ignore it to get away with something else! The last guy who was given the death penalty here in NZ was actually innocent if I remember correctly - his wife was poisoned to death and all circumstancial (sp?) evidence pointed to her hubby. Turns out their water tank or a container she was using to drink out of was leeching into the water (they were rural) and she was more susceptible. He was totally innocent. Also I believe that taking a life is still murder and while I would kill to protect my family if I was put in that position (I think most people would find it difficult not too) I couldn't condone the premeditated taking of a life even if it was deserved. Just didn't say anything earlier coz I was trying not to take on too many issues at once

ETA Blondy what you said about your parents not being abusive is exactly how I feel too!!!!

Edited by Babe

Sue Bradford resigned : JD, it did seem a bit contradictory...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:44:39 +0000

Author: tishy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:44pm

JD, it did seem a bit contradictory to me is all.

Regarding smacking, it is not something I would do to my kids, but it is not something I would judge someone else for doing either.

My own opinion is that verbal/emotional abuse is much worse than a light smack on the hand/bum.

Sue Bradford resigned : JM2CW... I said I wouldn't...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:37:18 +0000

Author: fattartsrock
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:37pm

JM2CW...

I said I wouldn't smack. Not sure why. Probably trying to sound PC. It was before I had children. Specifically before I had WILLFULL children who will continue to do dangerous and/or naughty things purposefully.
I have smacked. I will smack. It's not an "often" punishment, its an end of the road punishment. More often than not, just the THREAT of a smack is enough to get them to pull their heads in.
I do NOT abuse my children. Not mentally, not physically, not emotionally. In my OPINION a smack on the hand or a tap onthe bum dosen't constitute abuse.
I will NOT be told how to parent my children by a bunch of do gooders with nothing better to do. IMHO they ought to turn their attention to the real criminals out there. Those who actually beat and mentally abuse their children,. those who don't feed their children and fail to provide the basics, and those who drive people movers. Kidding on the last part, but sh*t, I hate those vehicles.

The important thing to remember here is we all choose to parent in the way we think suits our families best. All of us have different children. Differently behaved children, and from what I can see there are alot of you on here who have complete angels. Not many of those children are much older than 2, so....

For the record, my children are well behaved. VERY well behaved, and I think, in part, apart from good breeding (lol) that it is that they know there are consequences. They also have good manners and don't hit. They are both very gentle, also.

But yes, they can be right little sh*ts and very willfull too.

Sue Bradford resigned : is that coming across as me contradicting...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:33:53 +0000

Author: JD
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:33pm

is that coming across as me contradicting myself? Its not supposed to...and I know what I mean Im just gonna give up trying to explain myself...i was only giving my 2c worth in the first place, not trying to convice others to smack their kids.
Each to their own........you all seem like good mums....so, just, whatever

I think I might try and learn that dance on Pepsi's last post...my kids would get a real laugh...as would DH

Sue Bradford resigned : Yumi, you need some dancing lessons!...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:33:47 +0000

Author: lilfatty
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:33pm

Yumi, you need some dancing lessons!

Sue Bradford resigned : JD wrote:Just because it is...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:28:25 +0000

Author: tishy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:28pm

JD wrote:

Just because it is in the bible isnt the only reason we smack...In my experience it works well

JD previous post wrote:

I was smacked as a kid and I will smack my children....but only for the reason of disobedience and nothing else. since I was raised in a christian home and now run a christian home, it is in the bible to train your children this way.

Anyway I'm off to find my dancing shoes

Sue Bradford resigned : I'll start dancing now and...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:22:58 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:22pm

I'll start dancing now and wait for Kelly to start singing

Sue Bradford resigned : Littlebug - I agree with your...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:13:26 +0000

Author: JD
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:13pm

Littlebug - I agree with your above posts..

I feel that the anti-smacking debators are getting rather nasty with some of their replies. We are obviously not going to convince each other that one way is the right way...we just need to agree to disagree and be happy with our own choices when it comes to parenting.

I don't really like the suggestion that those who choose to smack are abusing their kids. it is definately not done in our house in an angry state and I also don't use it as a last resort, it use it for particular behaviour.

Bizzy - it sounds like you picture Christians as complete weirdo's who take everything the bible says literally...which to me is a wee bit ignorant.
It is a lifestyle that we have chosen and Im sure there are plenty of aspects of it that you don't agree with....but please don't judge. Just because it is in the bible isnt the only reason we smack...In my experience it works well. I don't think any less of you for not smacking your children. If you find other forms of discipline works for your family then that is great.

It must have been a very miniscule amount of people who were using the old law as a loop hole...and get away with it. I would think a jury should be able to tell abuse (as in belts, pipes, beatings etc) to a smack??? For a start a smack doesn't leave bruises and scars.

I actually think its other abuse that is more damaging for kids, like verbal and emotional abuse and neglecting kids. Its a shame there isn't a law to protect children from that.

Everyone has the right to parent their children however they want and I think its a hard enough job without being made to feel bad about the choices we make.

Sue Bradford resigned : Thats probably why I dont smack...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:10:19 +0000

Author: lilfatty
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:10pm

Thats probably why I dont smack Isabelle .. ive got too much of a temper and I would just be lashing out in anger. Then if I put her (and myself) into time out, it would seem stupid to then smack her as the time would have passed.

Sue Bradford resigned : Um i dont think that law closed...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:09:27 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:09pm

Um i dont think that law closed up any loop hole as in the end it is up to a judge who surely if a child was being horse whipped would have ruled it was unnecessary. I dont think a law change was required more likely the judges who let a parent get off with that need to re-evaluate their idea of reasonable force.

Prison is time out for adults and with the rate of re-offending i dont really think it is always effective.

As LB said smacking is a last resort because every situation is different josh knows if its a smack then it was a definite no no what he was doing its the same as the theory on never using dont with children unless its for something you dont ever want them to do otherwise the word loses its effectiveness.

I dont wait and smack him later he wont understand that at all. Yes i may be angry at the time but so long as i explain why i have smacked him straight away i dont see the problem. Time out however you can not tell me you are always calm while using this method i have seen a lot of kids get a smack as a result of a mother getting way too frustrated trying to get a child to stay in time out. Actually i have seen a lot of yell and screaming from the mothers trying to put their kids in time out and i see that as way worse than my little smack.

edit to add when i say im angry i dont mean lashing out angry i mean a calm angry where josh can see that he has upset me i dont want to appear to him as having no emotions that would be a bad thing.

Edited by WRXandJosh

Sue Bradford resigned : I'm soooo staying out of...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:04:19 +0000

Author: blondy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 9:04pm

I'm soooo staying out of the God debate lol

and on a very ironic note, I just randomly came across this link

this debate really has made me question what I will do when (not if!) my little madam of a DD requires something more than verbal reprimands - at the moment she actually listens and for the most part obeys what we tell her....and although I'm not anti-smacking, right now I feel I would have a really hard time carrying it out

But one thing I do agree with is that parents (like mine) who did smack from time to time for discipline (along with other more frequently used methods of discipline) should definitely not be labeled as abusers. My Mum only smacked me once out of anger when I was about 8 or 9 (and boy did I deserve it!) and even on her deathbed she apologised to me profusely....but I never held it against her, and always felt my parents did right by us.

Sue Bradford resigned : Yes I did wonder why we had the...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:53:51 +0000

Author: lilfatty
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:53pm

Yes I did wonder why we had the meaning of spank, when the law states smack

I get a little confused when people bring God into these subjects, especially when they condone smacking (spare the rod etc etc), but are quite willing to bring back the death penalty .. wasnt the first of the ten commandments, thou shall not kill?

Although I could be getting my posters confused, this is a very long thread!

Sue Bradford resigned : I think we are all in agreement...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:30:03 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:30pm

I think we are all in agreement that the law change won't stop child abuse, it wasn't the point of the law, the point was to close the loop hole that allowed some parents to get away with child abuse. Now when they still do it, they can be prosecuted, surely we would all agree that that is a good thing?

Spencer still finds new things to climb nearly everyday.

Sue Bradford resigned : The word was smack not spank and...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:24:46 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:24pm

The word was smack not spank and also I wasn't saying you think it means horse whip, but under the old law people did get away with things like that and those people obviously thought it was acceptable, changing the law ensures that everybody knows that it isn't.

As for the government, if you watched any of the pre-election debates you would have seen John Key on numerous occasions state that National was in full support of changing the law, that is why the referendum has not meant much and in my humble opinion was a complete waste of valuable money that could have been used for so many better things, that could have benefit children. The referendum has done nothing to help children at all. Those that don't discipline at all won't suddenly start doing so cos of this, those of us who don't smack won't suddenly think it is ok and those that do smack, have got what from it? not much, except to perhaps one up the government. The sad thing is most of the people that voted probably don't have children (or have grown up children) and even more probably had no idea what he law change was or why it was done, they have just voted cos of the media hype on it all.

Spencer has been taught to leave other things alone without smacking. I'm afraid I will never think it is necessary. I also think if a child is too young to comprehend time out, how can they be comprehending why you are smacking them?Coming back and smacking a child later on when you have calmed down and they have been sitting in their room waiting for their punishment seems worse to me in some ways, almost premeditated. I am so so glad that my parents never did that to me, it would have been just awful (IMO) (You was a universal you, not directed at any particular individual)

Sue Bradford resigned : WRX goodness knows but seems a...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:21:37 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:21pm

WRX goodness knows but seems a long way away after days like today - the little toerag got into the peanut butter (used a box from outside this time to get to the bench!) and emptied it all over his face, clothes and my couch two days ago it was into the fridge and the sour cream went everywhere!!! Arrgggh am so tempted to tie his hands to his toes!!!!!!

Twinboys, not me. I think spanking works and is entirely appropriate. I don't use it as a last resort, I just use it for particular behaviour. No single type of punishment is going to be appropriate for every situation and spanking is just the same.

ETA oh thanks Little Bug I agree word for word with both your last posts!!

Edited by Babe

Sue Bradford resigned : Twinboys2b wrote:For those...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:18:02 +0000

Author: LittleBug
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:18pm

Twinboys2b wrote:

For those who smack would you not smack if you found another way that worked?

It sounds like some of you try other methods first and only smack as a last resort - isn't that saying you agree that smacking is a bad thing to do since you use it as a 'last resort'?

I use other methods when I can, simply because it's more practical. Mainly I use time outs etc. They are effective in our household.

I have smacked on several occasions when time-outs haven't been a practical option for us, therefore we used a different method for correction.

Using it as a last resort makes sense... people who use smacking for correction don't go around hitting their children every 5 minutes for every single infraction, you know, because they enjoy it or because they are angry!!!

There are always plenty of parenting methods out there, and I don't think any parent sticks to just ONE particular method, because different approaches are applicable in different situations.

Sue Bradford resigned : We can't gate off our kitchen...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:13:36 +0000

Author: LittleBug
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:13pm

We can't gate off our kitchen either. Although I've never had to smack Chloe with regards to the oven because a series of time-outs for touching the oven when it was turned off seemed to do the trick.

The Bible verses are about correcting your child, not beating them black and blue. You would have to go back to the original language to be able to take it literally anyway.

I am quite horrified that people on this forum think I am an abuser because I have smacked my child on 3 occasions, for good reason, and never in anger. And they worked.

To me, being categorised as an abuser is exactly why the whole law change was a bad thing. I don't believe that any ACTUAL child abuse will be prevented, people who hurt their children already KNOW that they aren't meant to.

Sue Bradford resigned : oh yes when do they grow out of...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:11:57 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:11pm

oh yes when do they grow out of the dragging things to climb on stage????

Sue Bradford resigned : For those who smack would you...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:11:52 +0000

Author: Twinboys2b
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:11pm

For those who smack would you not smack if you found another way that worked?

It sounds like some of you try other methods first and only smack as a last resort - isn't that saying you agree that smacking is a bad thing to do since you use it as a 'last resort'?

Sue Bradford resigned : Babe wrote:Bizzy - remember...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:10:27 +0000

Author: Bobbie
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:10pm

Babe wrote:

Bizzy - remember the bible is a translation of a completely different, ancient language. Often what the words mean to us in english and in this day and age ARE NOT what would've been understood back then. The same word often had many different connotations too. Thats why I said it doesn't need to be taken literally

Exactly! In fact the Anglican Dean of Auckland was on TV last month explaining exactly that as people were assuming that the Anglican Church were anti the repeal.

Sue Bradford resigned : Yeah there isn't always a...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:00:30 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 8:00pm

Yeah there isn't always a different way to do it aye WRX?! We can't gate off our kitchen either and while we've baby or toddler-proofed the whole house to the best of our ability some things that hes able to get into are still unsafe. Jake can move the dining table chairs to the bench and reach the knives (or peanut butter jar ). Timeout doesn't work for us either so he gets a smack on the bum, a firm no and directed elsewhere. Oneday soon he'll reason out for himself why he can't do it but for now this works for us.

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy - remember the bible is...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:52:13 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:52pm

Bizzy - remember the bible is a translation of a completely different, ancient language. Often what the words mean to us in english and in this day and age ARE NOT what would've been understood back then. The same word often had many different connotations too. Thats why I said it doesn't need to be taken literally

The bible recommends (strongly!) to discipline your children and have strong moral boundaries and values. Parents who let their children get away with anything and everything are doing them no favours - I'm sure we would all agree on that! Children who run wild, are not taught to think on the things of others and are basically given whatever their spoilt little asses want are being done a huge disservice by their parents! They turn into dislikable, selfish, horrible adults who are often perpetrators of abuse because of their complete lack of boundaries!

Yeah I realise you were refering to the PP my parents spanked because they also believe that as long as its done only as a consequence to behaviour, not an emotional response, then its biblically sound. I just wanted to defend God a little bit lol He's one of the Good Guys even if He does condone corporal punishment

Sue Bradford resigned : There are busy bodies out there...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:51:11 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:51pm

There are busy bodies out there who do just ring the authorities or threaten too and there has been a thread on here about them before.

Its great that some people can gate off their kitchens mine is in a seperate room opposite end of the house from the lounge and wouldnt feel safe putting up a gate and not being able to watch my son play especially now he climbs everything while bake or sort out tea. The door is always closed when we arent in the kitchen. When we renovate and make it open plan kitchen living i have designed the kitchen so i can put up a gate but that wont be anytime soon. Josh also grasps the concept of hot he will blow on the oven and say hot then try and grab it again and has burnt himself before (well not burnt but scared himself cos it was a little too warm) and still he wants to touch and a quick smack will stop him until the next day. Unfortunately at his age repetition is the way they learn and this is working for him where as he doesnt understand time out. I will change technique when i think he has a better understanding but thats just my take on parenting my son and its working for us.

Sue Bradford resigned : spank v. spanked, spank·ing,...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:45:11 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:45pm

spank
v. spanked, spank�ing, spanks
v.tr.
To slap on the buttocks with a flat object or with the open hand, as for punishment.
v.intr.
To move briskly or spiritedly.
n.
A slap on the buttocks.

That is the dictionary definition of a spank - hmm I don't see anything here about beating or using a horse whip... Theres not really a huge range of possibilities that could be attached to the word spank considering that we all know what a punch is - the use of a fist, yes? A beating is synonomous (sp) with blood and bruising and so is a 'hiding'. I think the referendum question was worded fine even though it was a waste of time considering the 'democratic' government isn't listening to the people, not that thats new - the uproar over the original bill being put through by the last government should have stopped it in its tracks then we wouldn't have this bullsh*t!

Sue Bradford resigned : babe yeah i was refering to the...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:44:58 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:44pm

babe yeah i was refering to the person pages back (sorry i cant remember who) who said that her main reason for spanking was cause it is in the bible. i understand that not all christians spank... i'm probalby showing my ignorance really!

Sue Bradford resigned : and OMG!!! i'm obviously...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:42:07 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:42pm

and OMG!!! i'm obviously not the smartest cookie in the box but was researching this spare the rod spoil the child saying ....

As the Bible tells us: "He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24) and "Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell." (Proverbs 23:13-14)

Beat him...strike him... surely this is not a gentle smack given to your child for almost getting run over (for instance).. and i am sure that christian or not beating isnt acceptable - or is it because the bible says so!

I have obviously not got a religious background and was quite shocked by this....

Sue Bradford resigned : Well I came from a christian home...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:37:56 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:37pm

Well I came from a christian home and I was spanked. The verse in the bible along the lines of spare the rod, spoil the child doesn't have to be taken quite so literally though. Its about having boundaries on your children - they aren't born knowing right from wrong. If you aren't comfortable spanking then God won't punish you spanking has been a common use of punishment through the centuries, in christian and non-christian homes so its not a big bad God thing!

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy wrote:i am still trying...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:32:24 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:32pm

Bizzy wrote:

i am still trying to get my head around "its in the bible so i smack my child". surely basing your child raising techniques on a centuries old document is a bit outdated to say the least!

Haha, I was talking to DH about this part of it (he was raised in a Christian household), and he asked me if I had heard of "Winnie the Whale".. I said no, and he told me that it is a wooden paddle shaped after Winnie the Whale, which is sold in Christian book shops..especially for spanking the kids. I definitely don't agree with using implements to smack a child..and am pretty shocked about that one. He said heaps of his mums friends had them

Sue Bradford resigned : Bobbie wrote:Delete delete!...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:32:05 +0000

Author: caliandjack
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:32pm

Bobbie wrote:

Delete delete! Off to sit on my hands. Bloody hell almost started a whole new bunfight!

Ditto!

Sue Bradford resigned : SimSam wrote:For those that...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:31:23 +0000

Author: Babe
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:31pm

SimSam wrote:

For those that choose to smack - I am interested in how you manage anger with your children? If they are seeing a smack / hit / whack - whatever it is - as a result or by product of anger, what does that teach them to do when they get angry?

Spanking as a consequence to a known misbehaviour doesn't have anything to do with anger. As a kid we had to wait if mum or dad felt upset and then we would also talk about why they were angry - before we got spanked btw. As a parent myself I choose to spank Jake when he is displaying particular types of behaviour, he gets a warning and it doesn't get to the stage where I'm angry. If I am (I have a really mean temper btw) I quietly put him in his room doing my best to detach myself from my emotions while hes with me, tell him that I'm upset with his behaviour and I leave until I feel calmer. In that situation I avoid using spanking even when I'm cooled off, because then it wouldn't just be a consequence. I got my temper off my dad but I also was taught by him that there is no excuse for taking your anger out on others. I do sometimes get angry with Jake and yeah I have been rougher with him than I think is acceptable but I always take responsibility and apologise and I always look for ways to do this mummy-business better. Hope that answers your question. Just as a side note - parents who don't spank get angry too.

Sue Bradford resigned : cuppatea wrote:If because of...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:28:09 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:28pm

cuppatea wrote:

If because of those 7, one parent has gone to jail for abuse then no I do not think it is wrong. Those 7 parents chose to smack their child knowing what the law is, so they chose to deal with any possible stigma that would be attached to it. If you chose to break the law, then you chose to have the consequences.

It's like speeding in your car, plenty of people speed without hurting anyone, we all except though that if we get caught we will get a fine, regardless of whether our speeding caused an incident or not.

I agree and disagree with what you say (I do like the analogy )..

Yes I agree that people who believe a child is being abused..really abused, not just seeing a one-off smack to the bum, should report it. The part I disagree with is saying that people choose the break the law by smacking.. I guess because the definition of a smack isn't really the same to everyone, this is where the problem lies with unecessary complaints.. People see it as any kind of smack, rather than something more than a little smack.

Sue Bradford resigned : Delete delete! Off to sit on my...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:25:32 +0000

Author: Bobbie
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:25pm

Delete delete! Off to sit on my hands. Bloody hell almost started a whole new bunfight!

Edited by Bobbie

Sue Bradford resigned : i wonder who everyone thinks these...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:17:51 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:17pm

i wonder who everyone thinks these busy bodies are that go around ringing the police everytime they see someone smack/tap/spank their child?

anyway WRXandjosh i would imagine that the scenario of about to pull a shelf down on himself would probably come under the heading of minimising harm ...

for me if i had a tanruming child in the supermarket i would put him/her in the trolley.

i am still trying to get my head around "its in the bible so i smack my child". surely basing your child raising techniques on a centuries old document is a bit outdated to say the least!

Sue Bradford resigned : Quite often people (not just parents...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:07:13 +0000

Author: lilfatty
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:07pm

Quite often people (not just parents who have smacked their child) are not prosecuted, it doesn't mean that what they did was right.

For example, domestic abuse cases quite often don't go all the way through to the court as the complainant can withdraw the charge and retract or just refuse to give evidence.

Sue Bradford resigned : We gated our kitchen off to stop...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:05:25 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:05pm

We gated our kitchen off to stop Spencer touching the oven, or getting knifes or chemicals out Now he knows not to touch the oven and when I am using it he will point to it and tell me it is "hot". There is always another way.

In the supermarket, would you smack? or would you just pick him up or drag him away from it? I don't think anyone would ring the police for the latter when they could see he was going to hurt himself.

Sue Bradford resigned : If because of those 7, one parent...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:01:35 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 7:01pm

If because of those 7, one parent has gone to jail for abuse then no I do not think it is wrong. Those 7 parents chose to smack their child knowing what the law is, so they chose to deal with any possible stigma that would be attached to it. If you chose to break the law, then you chose to have the consequences.

It's like speeding in your car, plenty of people speed without hurting anyone, we all except though that if we get caught we will get a fine, regardless of whether our speeding caused an incident or not.

Sue Bradford resigned : weegee wrote:I really don't...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:57:57 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:57pm

weegee wrote:

I really don't want to get into the debate about smacking vs not smacking but just wanted to clear up a bit of a misconception as to what is and isn't allowed under the current law.
eg

emz wrote:

when he tries to run out onto the road or stick his fingers need the fire door when I'm putting wood in (and yes we have safety gates) a smack is more appropriate than time out

(sorry emz don't mean to pick on you but that was the most accessible example!)

The above is perfectly legal. The law says:

Crimes Act wrote:

Section 59 Parental control

(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of--
(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or
(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or
(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).

(4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.

So that means, if your kid is in imminent danger, or causing danger to another kid, or even if they're simply throwing the king of all tantys at the supermarket, you're allowed to use force. (The last one is eg you're allowed to forcibly pin them down to change their nappy.) What is illegal under the law is force for the purposes of correction only - eg once the danger has passed, saying "now little Johnny, don't run out in front of cars or you'll get a smack" *smack*.

[/QUOTE]

ok so if my son is throwing the mother of all tanties in the supermarket and or is about to pull a stand over on himself and i smack him i am not breaking the law? Cos i doubt the busy bodies who only know it as an anti smacking law will agree they will be straight to the authorities wasting time. My problem with the law is that people only see it as black and white that smacking is illegal fullstop.

Also if Josh gets a little smack for reaching for the oven for the 16th time he might have a little cry and be over it in 2 seconds and playing with something else. If i try to time out him it is an 1/2 hour or longer ordeal of him screaming and crying and fighting and biting. To me that seems worse than a little smack and more likely to affect him or cause issues.

Oh and Josh learnt to hit bite and kick from other peoples kids not from getting a smack when he was naughty. Poor boy didnt know what to do when i took him to a kids group and the other kids pushed him or hit him when he tried to play with or next to them. After a couple of visits he started doing the same so no i dont agree a smack teaches a child to hit.

Sue Bradford resigned : RachandJack wrote:Very true...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:57:52 +0000

Author: Bizzy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:57pm

RachandJack wrote:

Very true and I am the same. I put myself into time out sometimes to calm down. Thats actually how we use time out, as a calm down place to think about things, it is not for a set time more just until they (or me lol) are calm enough to talk about what happened and give whoever needs it a cuddle/apology.

sounds like how i use it.

Sue Bradford resigned : Results of the referendum is h...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:49:07 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:49pm

Results of the referendum is here:

http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/2009_citizens_referendum/

Small percentage maybe (over 50%, but still 1.6 Million votes, which is a lot of people)..

I don't think anyone disagrees that horsewhipping, or beating your child is completely and utterly wrong. I guess the biggest point I personally wanted to get across is that those of us here who have stood up and said we may occassionally smack our child (a little smack on the bum or hand), don't agree with the individuals who label us abusers, or bad parents. We are normal mums like everyone else who happen to chose a certain method to discipline our children, in conjuction with other methods. We are not these agressive angry monsters who lash out at our kids for every little thing.

It actually disturbs me that 7 parents were reported for something that in the end did not warrant prosectution. Surely that is just dragging 7 people over the coals for something they shouldn't have been there for? Nothing eventuated, but the stigma will always be attached to them.

Sue Bradford resigned : cuppatea wrote:Kelly I also...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:47:53 +0000

Author: Rachael21
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:47pm

cuppatea wrote:

Kelly I also have quite a temper, and sometimes a very short fuse, for this reason I use time out, gives me time to calm down as well and if he is really yanking my chain I put him in his room to play quietly for a while. Yep I am also worried what I might say, or that I might end up really screaming at him, which would be just as bad, and totally ineffective anyway, he would probably scream right back at me and parrot anything naughty I had said.

Very true and I am the same. I put myself into time out sometimes to calm down. Thats actually how we use time out, as a calm down place to think about things, it is not for a set time more just until they (or me lol) are calm enough to talk about what happened and give whoever needs it a cuddle/apology.

Sue Bradford resigned : Hehe maybe this thread should...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:42:57 +0000

Author: Lexidore
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:42pm

Hehe maybe this thread should be stickied, I think its going to keep going and going (kinda like the energizer bunny)

Sue Bradford resigned : Kelly I also have quite a temper,...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:39:58 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:39pm

Kelly I also have quite a temper, and sometimes a very short fuse, for this reason I use time out, gives me time to calm down as well and if he is really yanking my chain I put him in his room to play quietly for a while. Yep I am also worried what I might say, or that I might end up really screaming at him, which would be just as bad, and totally ineffective anyway, he would probably scream right back at me and parrot anything naughty I had said.

Sue Bradford resigned : I voted, I voted yes. I really...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:35:11 +0000

Author: cuppatea
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:35pm

I voted, I voted yes.

I really didn't like the wording of it. Yet again, what is a smack? Could a smack as part of good parental correction, in some peoples eyes, mean horse whipping your child? I use that as an example because there was a case of a women horse whipping her son and getting away with it before the act was changed, she and those like her were the reason for the change in the first place.

I totally agree with lilfatty, no it might not have done anything to stop child abuse but it has stopped some from using a loop hole to get away with it.

Also it said on the news that 7 parents had been reported for smacking and of those 7 the police had decided it wasn't in the public interest to prosecute any of them. That to me shows that the law is working as it is as those parents who have been reported for just a light smack and have not been prosecuted for it.

mrsg1 I was a bit confused with one bit you wrote. Do you think a child should not be able to contact the police if they are being smacked? I think that everybody, adults and children, has the right to not be hit and I think each and everyone of us has a right to report to the police if we are. Being a parent shouldn't give you any more right to hit somebody than it did before you were a parent. I also believe it is good the schools are telling children what their rights are, if you are brought up being hit then how would you know it was wrong to tell anybody and to get help? I expect the schools also explain to children about what is appropriate and inappropriate touching for the same reason, if a child is never told it is wrong they would never know to tell someone and get help.

Sue Bradford resigned : pepsi wrote:Well I think in...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:13:36 +0000

Author: Rachael21
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 6:13pm

pepsi wrote:

Well I think in the end the results of the referendum speaks for itself..

"Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

Something along the lines of 89% of people voting "No" to the question.. Whether or not you are a smacker.. seems the majority doesn't believe a smack really is abuse.

I can't remember the numbers but the percentage who actually voted wasn't very high. A lot of people didn't vote as they didn't feel the need to fight for the right to hit their children.

Edited by RachandJack

Sue Bradford resigned : I got the wooden spoon , and then...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:46:20 +0000

Author: caitlynsmygirl
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:46pm

I got the wooden spoon , and then when my brother broke it over his knee (that was funny ) we got the fish slice .
Im fine, haven't turned to drugs and alcohol , and for the most part , have a very good relationship with my parents ..im not saying it was right or wrong (tho it did hurt ) and im not going to critiicise my parents , cos that was what a lot did in "those days " but just wanted to clarify that not everyone who was smacked goes on to have issues later in life .
And if I was to choose to smack , it wouldn't be because my parents did and therefore I must too , a lot has changed since my parents had a bratty 4 year old (now they have a bratty 27 year old ;-) )
I have a hell of a temper , (I hide it well on here ...) and if i feel myself starting to lose it at C or Ty , I prefer the leave the room and calm down approach , not because of what I might physically do , but what I might SAY , imo , thats just as bad as any smack .

Sue Bradford resigned : mrsg1 wrote: SimSam wrote:At...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:40:57 +0000

Author: lilfatty
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:40pm

mrsg1 wrote:

SimSam wrote:

At the risk of sounding really contentious - I dont think the law was written for a lot of us. It was written for those people that perhaps only understand the "bullet points" IYGWIM - ie the headlines "Against the law to smack".....so they might think twice about picking up the broom / iron cord / wooden spoon / belt and using it on their kid. At the most basic level - if this law stops (by making people stop and think) at least one child from being beaten to death - then its a good thing.

That the trouble with the law though, is it hasn't and wont stop people who think its ok to use a jug cord/belt etc. Its not made any difference to the levels of child abuse.

The whole thing has been a waste of time and money, all from the result of Sue Bradfords 'private members bill'.

Good riddance to her. She's causing a lot families grief where there shouldn't be any.

BUT I think the repeal took away their defence .. so yes, it may not stop people from beating their chidren, but it means we can send them to jail.

Sue Bradford resigned : SimSam wrote:At the risk of...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:30:50 +0000

Author: caliandjack
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:30pm

SimSam wrote:

Sue Bradford resigned : For those that choose to smack...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:25:44 +0000

Author: MummyFreckle
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:25pm

In my childhood a family member (Mr X) was smacked frequently by an alcoholic father, with his hand, wooden spoon and the belt. In those days this wasnt thought of as abuse. As a teenager X had a lot of terrible issues, including a large problem with anger - which resulted in a physical violence with his father (as in they would get in punch ups). Violence as an outcome of anger was NORMAL to him, he didnt know how to manage it any other way.

Sue Bradford resigned : Even if the question is somewhat...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:20:13 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:20pm

Even if the question is somewhat confusing, if a person is 100% anti-smacking and believes that any form of a smack is abuse - then their vote would always be a "yes" wouldn't it? No exceptions? Just askin'..

Edited by pepsi

Sue Bradford resigned : pepsi wrote:Well I think in...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:15:11 +0000

Author: Paws
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:15pm

yeah but how many didn't vote because the question was loaded in such a way that again, confusion was caused over what exactly the bill is there to stop?

Sue Bradford resigned : Just to back up and quote from...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:14:02 +0000

Author: Paws
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:14pm

Just to back up and quote from weegee what is legal and what isn't...

emz wrote:

when he tries to run out onto the road or stick his fingers need the fire door when I'm putting wood in (and yes we have safety gates) a smack is more appropriate than time out

(sorry emz don't mean to pick on you but that was the most accessible example!)

The above is perfectly legal. The law says:

Sue Bradford resigned : Well I think in the end the results...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:11:15 +0000

Author: pepsi
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:11pm

Well I think in the end the results of the referendum speaks for itself..

"Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

Something along the lines of 89% of people voting "No" to the question.. Whether or not you are a smacker.. seems the majority doesn't believe a smack really is abuse.

Sue Bradford resigned : According to the legislation -...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:08:47 +0000

Author: caliandjack
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:08pm

According to the legislation - smacking has been deemed reasonable force - and there fore against the law.

Sue Bradford resigned : mrsg1 wrote:This issue with...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:05:04 +0000

Author: Paws
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 5:05pm

mrsg1 wrote:

This issue with the anti-smacking legislation that Sue Bradford brought in.
It now makes those parents that do choose to smack, open to prosecution for it.

Well again, this goes back to the fact that it is NOT anti-smacking legislation as was labelled by the media. It is the repeal of section 59 which takes away reasonable force as a defence for child abuse.

Sorry but if you are going to debate the legislation itself as opposed to debate smacking or not smacking, it does help to understand what the legislation is there for.

And Flake, you're not the only Christian household who does not smack, i don't know any in fact.

Sue Bradford resigned : mrsg1 wrote: Do those of you...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:48:00 +0000

Author: Rachael21
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 4:48pm

mrsg1 wrote:

Do those of you that are against smacking think that the parents that do should be punished for it?

Well if they aren't punished then theres no point of having a law so I guess yes they should be then, if you break a law you are punished. Maybe a compulsory parenting course for the first offence rather than a criminal conviction. I don't even know what the punishment is now but I totally agree on needing more support for parents.

Sue Bradford resigned : WRXandJosh wrote: And all research...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:44:42 +0000

Author: freckle
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 4:44pm

WRXandJosh wrote:

And all research has another study to disqualify it so no point even copying it into the argument as it doesnt really matter in the ends its just the way one set of people chose to view it (in big words and percentages) not the absolute only possible result.

Yes you may find conflicting research. Therefore, you need to be able to critque the research to determine if it was well designed, valid and reliable for the situation to which you are applying it. I would never consider one study as hard evidence, however, if there are many well designed studies supporting a view I would expect it has some weight as research examines things in a systematic manner . BTW I talking in general here not specific to this debate.

So I have to disagree WRX I absolutely believe research examining the effectiveness and negative implications of corporal punishment has a intergral place in a debate about corporal punishment.

Edited by freckle

Sue Bradford resigned : This issue with the anti-smacking...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:11:00 +0000

Author: caliandjack
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 4:11pm

This issue with the anti-smacking legislation that Sue Bradford brought in.
It now makes those parents that do choose to smack, open to prosecution for it.

Do those of you that are against smacking think that the parents that do should be punished for it?

They've had kids calling the cops on their parents for smacking since the legislation has been brought in, as the kids have learnt about it in school.

Parents need support not more legislation.

That's the most annoying part of this OP - Sue Bradford has gone, while she'll be forgotten soon enough - the debate about smacking is going to go on for a long time to come.

Sue Bradford resigned : RachandJack wrote:Not really...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:18:53 +0000

Author: Mamma2N
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 3:18pm

RachandJack wrote:

Not really getting into the domestic violence thing but I am actually pretty shocked at some of the attitudes. Just for the record the women's refuge knows that many women are not in the right place to leave so they have programmes to work with women to work on their relationships and not judge. All judging achieves is to make women feel even more worse and make it even harder for them to leave. Noone has been in every possible life situation so you can't really say how it is for everyone just because thats how it is for you.

Thanks RachandJack - that was really well said!

Sue Bradford resigned : I personally think the whole "It...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:38:55 +0000

Author: Rachael21
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:38pm

I personally think the whole "It happened to me and I'm fine" arguement is lame. I never listen to personal accounts because they don't tell us much I like statistics and real research. Just because you were fine doesn't mean your children will be (or their children) if research shows that smacking is more likely to cause 'problems' than not smacking. From that I take that smacking increases my children's chances of having 'problems' and I don't want that for them. At the end of the day you have to be accountable for your actions whatever they are and it seems like most of you 'smackers' are.

I actually don't give a toss about what parents think I think it is the childs right to not be hit. I guess my view is that hitting is violence and thats not acceptable in any other part of society so why should it be acceptable in parenting? That is why i think the law is great

Not really getting into the domestic violence thing but I am actually pretty shocked at some of the attitudes. Just for the record the women's refuge knows that many women are not in the right place to leave so they have programmes to work with women to work on their relationships and not judge. All judging achieves is to make women feel even more worse and make it even harder for them to leave. Noone has been in every possible life situation so you can't really say how it is for everyone just because thats how it is for you.

Edited by RachandJack

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy - yeah it does, and in my...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:30:53 +0000

Author: JD
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:30pm

Bizzy - yeah it does, and in my experience, if you follow the guidelines of the bible, things work out well for you. When you sway from it, things turn pear shaped. Not that I think there is anything wrong with those who choose not to smack.

Lilfatty - she isn't a slow learner, but was/is very strong willed and really tested the boundries on alot of things. Your kids are still young and I think not quite at the stage where they really start to test the rules. You may very well have the most well behaved children (my brothers kids are near purfect and that I think has to do with the different manerisms of the kids we all have). I cant see why you wouldn't have great kids...but you don't always know what tomorrow brings and as long as you have some strategy to bring them in line its all good. :-)

cuppatea - different strokes for different folks! It works for me and my family. You obviously have your reasons for being athiest....and thats your choice.

I realise not all christian households smack...I was just giving the reasons behind why we do.
Over the 13 years I have been a parent I have been to numerous parenting courses and workshops etc...in fact I still go to them when they are on locally as I feel you can never stop learning how to be a better parent. Smacking isnt the only form of discipline we use and like I said earlier it is only used for the one thing. We use alot of other ways to discipline and have found that our three children all react differently to different punishments. Time out is devistating for DD2, but DD1 I think likes the peace and quiet!!!

I am totally supportive of those who chose not to smack. But I cant stand those that dont do anything and let their kids run the house and terrorise others houses IYKWIM.

Im pleased we can respect each others differences and still be a supportive forum.
There are definately some things we all feel strongly about, but if we were all the same it would be a boring place...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bobbie wrote: tishy wrote: As...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:26:21 +0000

Author: tishy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:26pm

Bobbie wrote:

tishy wrote:

As long as we'll all agreed that dressing a 3yo in heels and a playboy top is most definitely abuse I'm happy

Are we taking a swing at Suri Cruise? I saw her on the cover of a mag wearing lippie and heels.

Really? I had no idea,

I was just thinking about the last time I was out a Porirua shopping centre

Sue Bradford resigned : Really ??? oh my Suri !!! your...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:23:57 +0000

Author: caitlynsmygirl
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:23pm

Really ??? oh my Suri !!! your two ! (or three ! )

Sue Bradford resigned : tishy wrote: As long as we'll...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:22:32 +0000

Author: Bobbie
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:22pm

tishy wrote:

As long as we'll all agreed that dressing a 3yo in heels and a playboy top is most definitely abuse I'm happy

Are we taking a swing at Suri Cruise? I saw her on the cover of a mag wearing lippie and heels.

Sue Bradford resigned : awe man tishy now i have to go...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:17:54 +0000

Author: WRXnKids
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:17pm

awe man tishy now i have to go change Josh can he keep on the mini skirt tho? hahaha

hehehe swinging handbags - its not like we are rugby players

Sue Bradford resigned : Just thought I'd add my husband...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:11:50 +0000

Author: flakesitchyfeet
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 2:11pm

Just thought I'd add my husband & I are Christian, running a Christian household, and we don't smack. Granted our daughter is ten months old, put even our pup doesn't get a tap on the bum. (although Mr. hypersensitive poodle reacts well to voice). I intend to keep it this way, and I think there are some awesome workshops etc to help encourage parents if no smacking disipline is something they wish to persue.

My husband, an amazing man, along with his 2 awesome brothers, were brought up in a strict Christian household, also without smacking, and they are wonderful, God following, all round good guys.

Not judging anyone, just wanted to make it known not all Christian households smack.

Edited by Flake

Sue Bradford resigned : What an interesting read! (took...

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:35:05 +0000

Author: tishy
Subject: 28984
Posted: 01�October�2009 at 1:35pm

What an interesting read! (took me 3 days to catch up)

As long as we'll all agreed that dressing a 3yo in heels and a playboy top is most definitely abuse I'm happy

OHbaby! Forums : Sue Bradford resigned

Sue Bradford resigned : Sheza wrote: Babe wrote: ...

Sue Bradford resigned : sounds like me emz - I have boxes...

Sue Bradford resigned : freckle, have to find my book...

Sue Bradford resigned : LOL that was a very frustrated...

Sue Bradford resigned : Babe wrote: freckle wrote:Babe-...

Sue Bradford resigned : emz wrote:It's not *that*...

Sue Bradford resigned : I think it speaks highly of the...

Sue Bradford resigned : I thought it has been pretty tame...

Sue Bradford resigned : It's not *that* bad I've...

Sue Bradford resigned : I didn't think this thread...

Sue Bradford resigned : well ive been avoiding this thread...

Sue Bradford resigned : Jeepers anyone would think you...

Sue Bradford resigned : My friend was murdered, I could...

Sue Bradford resigned : Jezsika wrote: Correct me all...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy wrote: cuppatea wrote:Yes...

Sue Bradford resigned : cuppatea wrote:Yes I totally...

Sue Bradford resigned : twinboys 2b you have the quote...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy wrote:...and i know too...

Sue Bradford resigned : Jezsika wrote:it really DOESNT...

Sue Bradford resigned : Sorry JD it did sound like you...

Sue Bradford resigned : I like you Jezsika you make good...

Sue Bradford resigned : Im not insinuation anything.Its...

Sue Bradford resigned : JD wrote: Bizzy - it sounds...

Sue Bradford resigned : nah, I just like arguing

Sue Bradford resigned : yeah yeee yah ! twenty pages !!!...

Sue Bradford resigned : Ah good old Bon Jovi, wonder were...

Sue Bradford resigned : LOL.. would you believe I was...

Sue Bradford resigned : This is by no means, meant to...

Sue Bradford resigned : WRXandJosh wrote:Um i dont...

Sue Bradford resigned : *waiting for babe to comment on...

Sue Bradford resigned : Babe you are obviously a stronger...

Sue Bradford resigned : I totally wasn't going to...

Sue Bradford resigned : haha i drive a people mover (not...

Sue Bradford resigned : Farttartsrock awesomely said!!!!...

Sue Bradford resigned : Haha oh that was me who put the...

Sue Bradford resigned : JD, it did seem a bit contradictory...

Sue Bradford resigned : JM2CW... I said I wouldn't...

Sue Bradford resigned : is that coming across as me contradicting...

Sue Bradford resigned : Yumi, you need some dancing lessons!...

Sue Bradford resigned : JD wrote:Just because it is...

Sue Bradford resigned : I'll start dancing now and...

Sue Bradford resigned : Littlebug - I agree with your...

Sue Bradford resigned : Thats probably why I dont smack...

Sue Bradford resigned : Um i dont think that law closed...

Sue Bradford resigned : I'm soooo staying out of...

Sue Bradford resigned : Yes I did wonder why we had the...

Sue Bradford resigned : I think we are all in agreement...

Sue Bradford resigned : The word was smack not spank and...

Sue Bradford resigned : WRX goodness knows but seems a...

Sue Bradford resigned : Twinboys2b wrote:For those...

Sue Bradford resigned : We can't gate off our kitchen...

Sue Bradford resigned : oh yes when do they grow out of...

Sue Bradford resigned : For those who smack would you...

Sue Bradford resigned : Babe wrote:Bizzy - remember...

Sue Bradford resigned : Yeah there isn't always a...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy - remember the bible is...

Sue Bradford resigned : There are busy bodies out there...

Sue Bradford resigned : spank v. spanked, spank·ing,...

Sue Bradford resigned : babe yeah i was refering to the...

Sue Bradford resigned : and OMG!!! i'm obviously...

Sue Bradford resigned : Well I came from a christian home...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bizzy wrote:i am still trying...

Sue Bradford resigned : Bobbie wrote:Delete delete!...

Sue Bradford resigned : SimSam wrote:For those that...

Sue Bradford resigned : cuppatea wrote:If because of...

Sue Bradford resigned : Delete delete! Off to sit on my...

Sue Bradford resigned : i wonder who everyone thinks these...

Sue Bradford resigned : Quite often people (not just parents...

Sue Bradford resigned : We gated our kitchen off to stop...

Sue Bradford resigned : If because of those 7, one parent...

Sue Bradford resigned : weegee wrote:I really don't...

Sue Bradford resigned : RachandJack wrote:Very true...

Sue Bradford resigned : Results of the referendum is h...

Sue Bradford resigned : cuppatea wrote:Kelly I also...

Sue Bradford resigned : Hehe maybe this thread should...

Sue Bradford resigned : Kelly I also have quite a temper,...

Sue Bradford resigned : I voted, I voted yes. I really...

Sue Bradford resigned : pepsi wrote:Well I think in...

Sue Bradford resigned : I got the wooden spoon , and then...

Sue Bradford resigned : emz wrote:It's not that...

Sue Bradford resigned : It's not that bad I've...