Kansas Wants to Return to the Good Old Days of Teachers Spanking Kids

Comments

1
Ah the good old days, when children knew that stepping out of line would result in severe beatings.

Also, how does allowing teachers the right to spank kids restore PARENTAL rights? Are they just worried that kids seeing other kids not being beaten, and those kids behaving, will make the kids react badly to the beatings they receive at home?
2
Can we pass a bill that lawmakers can be beaten by their constituents?

Better yet, can we pass a bill that if lawmakers pass bills that are completely blatantly 100% unconstitutional, they can be sued for court costs incurred by both sides in the ensuing legal battle?
3
Technically the SCOTUS has not ruled it illegal to spank kids in school so allowable, but I think it something only parents should be allowed to do.
4
I'll get the branding iron hot.
5
Next up for Kansas: Why are women allowed to vote and own land? Let's get on that.
6
You do know that these are bill *introductions* right? Bills like this usually never go anywhere (see, for example, half of Tom Benton's bills here in wa, including ones about black helicopters).
But still, it gives you a chance to act smug and superior to those backward rural types. Boy, you progressive city people are SO smart! Great job being so SMART and with it!
7
Don't be so condescending. Beating your children (corporal punishment) is still legal in WA state. Let's clean our house first and ban child abuse to join modern times like countries in Africa, Europe, South America, and Oceania.
8
Howard Stern said it this morning: you're beating your kids for your own failings, not theirs. If you were better parents/teachers, kids wouldn't need spankings.
9
There's no place like home
10
To play devil's advocate here: What, exactly, ARE teachers supposed to do these days with problematic kids? You can't threaten to fail a kid, as that would affect graduation rates (and besides, the parents would complain and the principal would make you give them an A). You can't threaten to expel them for the same reason. You can't touch them or you'll get sued, and you can't just ignore them or you'll lose all control of the classroom. And don't say "kick them out of the room any time they cause trouble", as soon enough administration will say that it reflects poorly on your abilities as a teacher and you'll be fired.

I realize that in this magic liberal society we're all supposed to be polite and cultured, but it turns out quite a few kids aren't scared or influenced by being yelled at (and obviously can't be reasoned with) once they realize there's no real danger behind it.
11
Kansas isn't even properly rectangular.
12
Another righty trying to look tough.
13
Every Republican in the Kansas legislature should get a bare ass whipping, in the next election.
14
@10 the answer appears to be no discipline whatsoever, from what I observe when I see children and their parents out in public.
15
@10: What makes you think the troublemakers aren't already getting beaten at home?
16
Kansas---creating a new generation of Punk Rockers
17
@11: Made me snort.
18
School spankings are already legal in Kansas so long as the punishments doesn't leave marks.

What Democratic State Rep. Gail Finney proposed bill does is amend the current law to allow “up to ten forceful applications in succession of a bare, open-hand palm against the clothed buttocks of a child and any such reasonable physical force on the child as may be necessary to hold, restrain or control the child in the course of maintaining authority over the child, acknowledging that redness or bruising may occur on the tender skin of a child as a result.”

http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14…

Come on slog
19
@7: And Amurka has to end capital punishment before we can criticize North Korea executing people with anti-aircraft guns, right?
20
Ah, yep! Nothin' like a good ole social exper'ment fomented by activist lawmakers. Can't wait to see how Kansas turns out in 20-40 years!
21
opps thought I deleted that last bit "come on slog" was going to snark a little but then decided not to.
22
@10 I'm a public school teacher. We can't (and don't want to) beat kids, but we can (and do) fail, suspend, and expel.

It works pretty well.
23
@10 You're assuming spanking works for its stated purpose (that is, obedience based on fear of punishment). I'm pretty sure it doesn't. Kids either socialize normally, and don't need spanking anyway (but might not be harmed by it), or don't socialize normally, and spanking is probably counter-productive.

Spanking is like torturing people for information -- we have this weird urge to do it, so we try to justify it as a thing that brings about a desired outcome. But most actual evidence points the other way. We should just admit that spanking and torture exist primarily to appease our impulse to cause pain and exact revenge.
24
Let em do it, see what happens to the state. No need to stick our noses in their business, just like they don't need to be telling us what state laws we pass.
25
@10 in my experience working with children (teaching swimming and lifeguarding) most kids do well with clear and reasonable expectations. If a kiddo is more difficult I wasn't above making them feel guilty about their behavior or offering a reward (usually a more “fun” way of learning) for good behavior. I’m sure an actual teacher has many more tricks for problematic students, but I’ve found children for the most part respond really well to clear communication, reasonable expectations for their age, the occasional guilt trip, and rewards when they do well. Spanking isn't needed.
26
@10, you're obviously not a parent. You should need spankings or anything else. Teacher or parent, you are the alpha dog and you establish that from the get go.

Good behavior, good results.
Bad behavior, bad results.

Kids DO like structure and want to know there are limits and expectations.

Be consistent, be fair and 95% of the kids are there. The other ones? They can be in the principal's office and not bothering the rest of the class.

27
I dunno I knew plenty of kids, well non-white ones anyways, who were spanked, either on the butt or the face, as children, not excessively just one or two hits. Everyone of them seemed to be just fine as an adult. I'm not saying everyone should use it but seems a bit much to call it abuse.
28
Tens of thousands of kids still get legally hit in school in the USA. Including in a small number of private schools in WA, where it's still legal. Hundreds of thousands at home in the USA. This isn't new, an experiment, or unusual. It would make a much larger difference to ban child abuse at homes in WA state.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/13… (autoplays a video)
29
Why child abuse (corporal punishment) is bad: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pag…

Ignoring the fact that even if corporal punishment had no negative effects on kids as children or when they grow up, it's not acceptable to intentionally cause pain in children.

In Sweden, two Malaysian parents working there were recently arrested and face up to 10 years in prison for beating their children (common corporal punishment in both the USA and Malaysia). In Sweden they rightly outlaw child abuse and have for much longer than WA state has outlawed child abuse in public schools. Many Malaysians are in an uproar, just like Americans would be if they were American parents. It's bizarre that there could even be disagreement on this.

http://malaysiandigest.com/frontpage/29-…
30
@27- They probably would have been fine if their parents didn't hit them. So what is better, hitting kids or not hitting kids?
31
Sounds like Kansas wants to raise the next generation of kinksters.
33
Mild discipline to shame a child is usually better than kicking them out of school or throwing them in the criminal justice system. Yet all too often we resort to criminalizing or expelling for behavior that could be corrected much easily with much less impact on the child's life.
34
Fuck..... It is currently legal to spank kids in school in Kansas, so long as you don't leave marks.

What this bill proposed by a Democrat advocates is 10 swats sufficient to leave marks, including the marks left to hold the child down while delivering them, on a child's clothed buttocks.

See @18

FUCK
35
As someone who has had at least two wooden spoons break across his ass,* I can say from personal experience that this sort of punishment is... counter-productive.

*insert joke about the ripeness of my pant-melons here
36
@29, thank you.

more than 150 studies show associations between corporal
punishment and a wide range of negative outcomes, while no studies have found evidence of any benefits.



Thank you, Raku. Not sure WTF why: but if a man hits a smaller and weaker woman, it's an assault. But if an adult hits a small, weak (and emotionally immature) child it's somehow OK. And if an angry rager hits a child to vent frustration, rather than punish, HEY, it's still OK. I remember being a small child, and I can tell you I'm approximately the same person, just bigger and with more skills.
37
@10

As a kid, I got spanked as the bill suggests. Regardless of the nature of the infraction, I knew I could be hit at any time. I could be hit for having a strange expression, or holding a utensil improperly, or not having my napkin in my lap at the correct time, or failing to ace a black diamond ski slope, or for lying to my mother. All the spanking accomplished was stoking in me an abiding fear and anger that I still struggle to extinguish. It didn't make me behave better.
38
@37, word.