anonemouse

Exactly. To say that no one can be made to feel guilty if they are not guilty is ignoring years of evidence to the contrary. What about cases where child-abuse victims are taught to be ashamed of their bodily functions or their appearance? People don't start out with that feeling, it's taught to them. Our entire society is based on teaching people certain moralities that aren't ingrained. In western society, women are taught that they must cover their breasts and crotch and they feel very guilty and "wrong," in many cases, when they don't. In some South American and African tribal societies, they aren't.

Well, according to the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association, it doesn't exist. And I would think that they would be the ones who would know. Do I think that there are women out there who do have psychological effects after an abortion? Of course, but that doesn't mean that the abortion caused the psychological effects. Like the American Psychological and the American Psychiatric Associations say, the best indicator of a woman's psychological health after an abortion is her psychological health before an abortion. And to be honest, I am pretty sure that I could come up with some statistics that relate pregnancy and child-rearing to child abuse, in the way that people that aren't parents are less likely to abuse a child. That doesn't mean, though, that child abuse is a direct result of a woman being pregnant and giving birth.

Gadget, I think we're talking about two different things. Read through all those papers for me, would you? Tell me the number of times "post-abortion syndrome" is used. I bet you won't find many, if any at all. From Wikipedia.

PAS isn't just what a magazine claims is made-up. It isn't even recognized by the American Psychological Association or the American Psychiatric Association or any other Association as a real condition. From the NAF:

Then can you point us to one in a large, reputable, medical, psychiatric, or psychological sciences journal? Not one of these minor, obscure, or internet journals.

An interesting article regarding the supposed "Post-Abortion Syndrome:" Ms. Magazine Online And the Internet Journal of Pediatrics and Neonatology isn't exactly JAMA.

I love McCallister's, Kyethra! Their beef, peppers, and onion sandwich is yummy! Their baked potatoes are incredible, too. And peonies are one of my favorite flowers! I love the smell of them. Gorgeous!

I don't think anything BUT a confrontation would work with her. It sounds like she is probably depressed, along with some other problems, and is trying to make everyone else's lives as miserable as hers. I'd give her an ultimatum about either seeing a therapist or not seeing you guys.

I want to throw my telephone and answering machine in the toilet! I keep getting telemarketing calls from Bell South. I never answer them anymore, but when they go to my answering machine, they leave this really high-pitched beeping/buzzing sound that last for several minutes. It's driving me crazy! They call every single day! And I'm on a no-call list, but since I use Bell South for phone service, they can still call me. :youcandothis:

I agree with Sunta. No one speaks ill about someone with nothing to speak ill about. Jerry Falwell was not a saint, and I hate it when people pretend that death somehow washes a person clean of all the bad things that they've done.

The thing is, wouldn't public humiliation serve as a further disciplinary action? If a child remembers that she got spanked in front of her friends for doing a certain thing, wouldn't that be a greater impetus to not do that thing again? I don't buy the "protecting them from public humiliation" defense.

See, to me, that says that you realize that your punishment isn't proper for public use. And again, if you can't punish your children in public, you shouldn't be using that method.

There is a midpoint between "slapping children repeatedly in public" and cold-bloodedly whipping them. If you can't see that, then that says a heck of a lot about you.

I've thought about it for a while, and I think that part of what I found disturbing is that you seem to be back-tracking. You said you use a "flexible leather implement," but then you said that it isn't a "flexible leather implement," after all. You said that the punishment is meant to inflict pain, and then you said, "but it only stings a little." You said that you have your children keep their hands on the wall while you hit them, but then you said that you only hit them once or twice. (Which doesn't make sense because, in my experience, children only really try to block painful, repeated blows. If there is only one or two "stinging" blows, most children I've observed, including myself when I was spanked as a child, don't try to block the next one. And if you are hitting them only hard enough to sting, and not create marks, it shouldn't matter if the strap or whatever it is hits their arm, since the blow wouldn't be enough to do anything.) You seemed proud of what you were doing, but once people started speaking up against it (even people who do spank their children), you said that you really aren't doing what you said you were doing. Then you started trying to portray those people that do spank their children as uncaring, anger-filled monsters.

To be honest, the whole thing is disturbing to me. I can't tell you why, but it is. I'll have to think about it. If I can figure out why that punishment is disturbing, I'll let you know. Someone "spanking" their child isn't disturbing to me, yet what you are describing is, for some reason.

Gadget, I can't talk for anyone else, but it isn't the anger-free punishment that bothers, just the method of punishment. I am a huge supporter of not punishing a child while the adult is angry. I think that DOES lead to the adult going farther than they otherwise would. I just don't believe in hitting someone with an "implement."

Has LBT gone a little wacky for anyone else? There was a while last night where all I could get was a message saying that a file is corrupt. Ever since then, I have been getting 404 errors when I click on some threads.

So you wouldn't hesitate to do this to your children in a mall, then? I invite you to do it, then. The next time your children act up, take them to your local mall, right into the food court. Apply your punishment there, and see what happens. If you don't get people coming up to you, or security isn't called, or you don't get arrested, I'll eat my hat. I would imagine that the humiliation would just be extra enforcement to a child.

Gadget, what exactly is your "flexible leather stick," then? And let me ask you this: Would you be willing to give this punishment in the middle of your local mall, if your daughters "acted up" there?

I wouldn't dream of turning someone in to family services for an authentic spanking in public. Simple swats on the rear with a hand isn't child abuse to me, and I doubt most people feel that it is. I think spanking like you are talking about could be commonly applied in public without the fear of being arrested. That's why I said that if you believe that your method of physical punishment could be applied in public with little fear of arrest or interference from other people, it would probably be a proper punishment. I think, though, that if a parent wouldn't dare apply their type of physical punishment on their child in public without intense fear that someone would interfere, they are probably going too far in the punishment. The bottom line, IMO, is that if you can do it in public, it's a decent punishment; if you can't, it's abuse.

Yes, I am. Here is what you said that you do to your children: Here's the definition of whipping: By your own admission, you whip your children. I don't care if you call it "swatting" or "switching," or whatever, it is whipping. And to be honest, if I ever saw you do it in public, I'd be the first to call the police. You may do it so that you don't leave marks, but you are whipping your children.

I think the real test of physical punishment is whether or not it could be applied in public with little or no interference from surrounding people. If you can't do it in public, it probably shouldn't be done. I think having your children lean against a wall in public, not allowing them to shield themselves, while you hit them with a switch or other "implement" would be a really quick way to find yourself either in jail or being visited by family services. A light smack on the butt won't get anyone visited by family services and sure won't get anyone arrested. Whipping someone will.

I think it is just one of the quirks of the English language. Here's the entry I learned it in (it was a listing of pet-peeves in online fanfiction):

The key words there are "medically necessary." You need to find out their standards for "medically necessary" surgery. I would assume that you are fine, though, since you have a BMI of at least 40 and have co-morbidities.

I'm sorry, is that supposed to be funny or supportive? One of the basic rules here is that you don't attack the person, you attack the idea. Not all of us think that you attacking and ridiculing someone is funny.