• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Abuse not love or discipline

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

single317dad

Senior Member
Yes, there is. Self defense.

You always have a right and excuse to defend yourself.

DC
From a moral and social standpoint, I agree with you. From a strictly legal perspective, it doesn't work that way. Self defense as a legal defense usually only kicks in when you can reasonably believe that you're in immediate danger of grievous injury.
 


single317dad

Senior Member
The part of this that appalls me the most isn't the acts themselves, as I have been aware of this sort of thing and the aversion of eyes for a quarter of a century, but the attempt by some to try and separate Rice's actions from his being a player. They think he shouldn't be disciplined because it had nothing to do with football and it doesn't matter whether he's a thug off the field as long as he delivers the goods on the field. I saw these interviews with fans - even female fans - standing up for him and using the excuse that he's a good football player so we shouldn't hold his thuggish ways against him.

So long as we continue to dismiss any connection between character and the man (or woman), we will continue to get this sort of deviance. Its okay that someone lies, commits adultery, or is otherwise a snake, because he's a good Congressman/Senator/President (i.e. he supports my political worldview). It's okay that someone beat his child/wife/dog because he's a great ballplayer. I don't get it?!? Society has deteriorated to a point where we have created conditional morality. We except criminally deviant acts by marginalizing them - by creating a niche or excuse as to why they are acceptable in a particular context. Instead, we should be shunning the individual who commits such acts and express our dismay and outrage over the commission of such violent or immoral acts by those we might otherwise agree with.
Our "great men" have always been mortal, fallible people. We're just much more likely to see the evidence of that these days, what with the ubiquity of cameras and the constant possibility of TMZ being around the next corner. Thomas Jefferson had his Sally Hemings. Babe Ruth was a drunk and a womanizer. Cary Grant had an adulterous relationship with Randolph Scott (among other indiscretions). It's even rumored (with significant evidence) that Mozart had a bit of a scat fetish. Imagine if those revered figures had lived in the age of Twitter.
 

Proserpina

Senior Member
Our "great men" have always been mortal, fallible people. We're just much more likely to see the evidence of that these days, what with the ubiquity of cameras and the constant possibility of TMZ being around the next corner. Thomas Jefferson had his Sally Hemings. Babe Ruth was a drunk and a womanizer. Cary Grant had an adulterous relationship with Randolph Scott (among other indiscretions). It's even rumored (with significant evidence) that Mozart had a bit of a scat fetish. Imagine if those revered figures had lived in the age of Twitter.

Ya had to mention Mozart, dincha? Then again, his ... issue ... didn't victimize anyone else.

That does make a difference (to me).
 

single317dad

Senior Member
Ya had to mention Mozart, dincha? Then again, his ... issue ... didn't victimize anyone else.

That does make a difference (to me).
In the context of this thread, sure, it absolutely makes a difference. But in the arena of public opinion, just look at what Richard Gere has endured over a rumor that's probably not even true. There would be pictures of Mozart's private life on someone's cloud drive just waiting for 4Chan to release them.
 

>Charlotte<

Lurker
Stop calling it a "spanking". Every article I read and every conversation I follow keeps using the word "spank". Debate corporal punishment all you want, but this was not a spanking. I've seen the pictures, this was a vicious beating.
 

tranquility

Senior Member
Stop calling it a "spanking". Every article I read and every conversation I follow keeps using the word "spank". Debate corporal punishment all you want, but this was not a spanking. I've seen the pictures, this was a vicious beating.
It was a multi-factorial error that begins with a repetition of life's lessons, carries through to a boy/man who is a multi-million dollar business in an "industry" that one only excels when one can physically dominate another--sometimes through the use of chemicals that have effect upon mood and aggression.

The five protective factors (http://www.cssp.org/reform/strengthening-families/the-basics/protective-factors):

Parental Resilience
No one can eliminate stress from parenting, but a parent�s capacity for resilience can affect how a parent deals with stress. Resilience is the ability to manage and bounce back from all types of challenges that emerge in every family�s life. It means finding ways to solve problems, building and sustaining trusting relationships including relationships with your own child, and knowing how to seek help when necessary.

Social Connections
Friends, family members, neighbors and community members provide emotional support, help solve problems, offer parenting advice and give concrete assistance to parents. Networks of support are essential to parents and also offer opportunities for people to �give back�, an important part of self- esteem as well as a benefit for the community. Isolated families may need extra help in reaching out to build positive relationships.

Concrete Support in Times of Need
Meeting basic economic needs like food, shelter, clothing and health care is essential for families to thrive. Likewise, when families encounter a crisis such as domestic violence, mental illness or substance abuse, adequate services and supports need to be in place to provide stability, treatment and help for family members to get through the crisis.

Knowledge of Parenting and Child Development
Accurate information about child development and appropriate expectations for children�s behavior at every age help parents see their children and youth in a positive light and promote their healthy development. Information can come from many sources, including family members as well as parent education classes and surfing the internet. Studies show information is most effective when it comes at the precise time parents need it to understand their own children. Parents who experienced harsh discipline or other negative childhood experiences may need extra help to change the parenting patterns they learned as children.

Social and Emotional Competence of Children
A child or youth�s ability to interact positively with others, self-regulate their behavior and effec�tively communicate their feelings has a positive impact on their relationships with their family, other adults, and peers. Challenging behaviors or delayed development create extra stress for families, so early identification and assistance for both parents and children can head off nega�tive results and keep development on track.
In the situation being discussed, with the possible exception of Concrete support in time of need factor, I don't see a positive situation. (And, the concrete support is only for basic economic needs. The fame issue in the equation might make the stability, treatment and help pillar difficult. Just look how we are discussing it here.)

Certainly, the NFL can help with education, training and support for the younger members regarding positive family roles. But, even in situations where programs are put into place early on, there is still not a huge success. Upbringing is very hard to overcome. Combine that with the difficulties specific to the young men in professional football and I can't see how the league can do anything productive. That we talk more about these stars and the domestic violence against their significant other or their children, seems a bit more titillation or a political agenda not related to the broader problem out there than an true attempt to deal with things.
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
This is not a new issue. Athletes (and parents) beating their kids goes way, way back. (Just to pick one from my Family Court days: http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/10/sports/da-still-looking-into-everett-abuse-case.html).

The rule of thumb when doing intake is that yes, parents have the right to physically discipline their kids. But when they leave permanent marks (anything other than some temporary redness), that crosses the line and they got hauled in. Hitting them in a way of causing serious disfigurement, even without leaving a mark, was also cause for a case to be filed, at least for me. (This came up a lot when beating the kid with a belt and "accidentally" getting them in the face/eyes). But there was usually some discussion first before filing the "gray area" cases.

But beating them in the genitals? Beating them till they bled? 100% going to get rung up on that. Only real issue at that point is whether to charge abuse or merely neglect.
 

Just Blue

Senior Member
I did'nt look at the pic's as I think it would make me sick.

But a "man" that beats a small child/ANY CHILD to the point of bleeding should be arrested, convicted and placed in prison till hell freezes over.

He should not get to continue on with his job, life and talk selfserving smack to the media. IMO.

Thanks Ohiogal for starting this thread. I, for one, think it was a good and necessary one.
 

single317dad

Senior Member
Let's not forget this little gem from a year ago:

http://nypost.com/2013/10/17/adrian-peterson-could-have-7-kids-ex/

and the fact that one of AP's other children was murdered by a babymama's boyfriend's beating.

My question is how will these guys pay their child support and alimony when their jobs are taken away? What about the CEO of a corporation, should they lose their job as well when they do wrong? Don't their victims deserve to be compensated? Can't those victims be best compensated if the abuser continues to work at the job that will pay them the most money?
 

tranquility

Senior Member
I did'nt look at the pic's as I think it would make me sick.

But a "man" that beats a small child/ANY CHILD to the point of bleeding should be arrested, convicted and placed in prison till hell freezes over.

He should not get to continue on with his job, life and talk selfserving smack to the media. IMO.
Let's look to second order here. What is that child's life going to be with a productive dad in the picture as opposed to an essentially fatherless child?

Not to excuse what is clearly abuse, but, THINK OF THE CHILDREN! (Reg. U.S. pat off.)

This man's son, if dad maintains his income and presence in his life, is going to have a FAR better life by any measure than if dad is gone for the rest of his life and mom has to rely on her own abilities to care for he and the other children in the family. (In this case, absent other claims mom allowed such abuse previously or participated in it, the kids are not going to go into the System. A system with all kinds of problems on its own.) Far better. He will probably grow up with some sense of discipline and a desire to act with respect towards others, one day will attend college and/or have the funds to start his own business or otherwise learn a skill to support himself and his family. While the long-term consequences are difficult to predict, both from the specifics of the abuse and from the "resilience" of the child, it is quite possible this child's worst result from the abuse is the far greater likelihood he will be an abuser when he is a father. A strong male model who has had treatment to understand the issues and who does not commit such abuse again can be some of the best things that happen to this child's future and the children of this child's future. While CPS personnel are always quick to remove a child under possible abuse situations, they also work hard to return the child to family. Most states have huge presumptions relating to the parents being the best one's to care for their children. Even if the parents have issues.

So, if we look to a single instance and demand action that may not help the child (depending on all the facts) and is likely to hurt the child out of emotions, is that the same error the father made? The child did a disrespectful thing and dad dealt with him in the way he was trained in child-raising by his father in order to make the child better. Was the abuse wrong? Yes. Are there not numerous other strategies that would have accomplished the same or better things without the possibility of injury? (Short or long term.) Of course. But, why do you want to punish the child again without knowing all the facts?

My wife trains social workers on the differences between abuse and neglect and how to document them in ways to regularize the data. This is an attempt to try to remove the subjectiveness of the process and inject some objectiveness. You see, things are rarely clear; they are rarely black and white where zero tolerance is the proper call. You would be amazed at the studies regarding the observer's (social worker's) history and how that affects the decision made. That is, the remove or no decision and the culpability of which parent for their acts or omissions can be more a product of the social worker's pathologies than on the specifics of a particular set of facts.

The point is not to excuse either the fiance beater or the child beater being discussed. The point is to show this is an extremely hard problem to deal with. And, as has been the case in every instance where the emotions come out, zero tolerance does not seem the answer. It never seems to fix the underlying problems and usually adds another set of problems on top.
 
Last edited:

cetiya

Member
i saw the pictures. on one leg there was at least 10 marks. the front of the leg. who knows how many marks was on the back, butt, back of legs. he must have hit that kid over 20 times ill bet. way way excessive. god help the rest of his kids.
 

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
Another report has come out that Adrian Peterson beat another of his children last year -- that child was also four years old.
 

torimac

Member
Let's not forget this little gem from a year ago:

http://nypost.com/2013/10/17/adrian-peterson-could-have-7-kids-ex/

and the fact that one of AP's other children was murdered by a babymama's boyfriend's beating.

My question is how will these guys pay their child support and alimony when their jobs are taken away? What about the CEO of a corporation, should they lose their job as well when they do wrong? Don't their victims deserve to be compensated? Can't those victims be best compensated if the abuser continues to work at the job that will pay them the most money?
In order to justify that level of compensation, we would need to return to the old legal system of paying victims compensation instead of assigning jail time to criminals, such as Salic law or old Germanic law. Many argue that the criminals are then simply working to pay a debt, or a form of enslavement.

Personally, I see very little use in locking up non-violent criminals. Prison seems to do little to deter such criminals
(http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1120 ) perhaps large fines would. At the very least they would offer some compensation to the victims, instead of revenge, which is what the system seems to do now. At least with compensation, the victims could afford to get health care, including mental health care, necessary for dealing with the crime.

ETA: link for reference
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
In order to justify that level of compensation, we would need to return to the old legal system of paying victims compensation instead of assigning jail time to criminals, such as Salic law or old Germanic law. Many argue that the criminals are then simply working to pay a debt, or a form of enslavement.

Personally, I see very little use in locking up non-violent criminals. Prison seems to do little to deter such criminals
(http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1120 ) perhaps large fines would. At the very least they would offer some compensation to the victims, instead of revenge, which is what the system seems to do now. At least with compensation, the victims could afford to get health care, including mental health care, necessary for dealing with the crime.

ETA: link for reference
So, are you saying that beating your child bloody with a switch is NOT a violent crime?
 

torimac

Member
So, are you saying that beating your child bloody with a switch is NOT a violent crime?
No, I was addressing the broader issue of child support payments and crimes in general. I think most of us agree that beating a child with a switch is a violent crime and child abuse.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top