corporal punishment

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Not sure what you don't understand about the following statement:
"The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly opposes striking a child for any reason."

It means that regardless of whatever "reason" might be given, the AAP is STRONGLY OPPOSED to striking a child.

Therefore, the AAP are:
STRONGLY OPPOSED to striking a child even if it "is not int ou or anybody else may dream up.

Do you understand the statement now?

Step 2: Try to dislodge the object with back blows and abdominal thrusts.

First do back blows

If a child is conscious but can't cough, talk, or breathe, or is beginning to turn blue, stand or kneel slightly behind him. Provide support by placing one arm diagonally across his chest and lean him forward.

Firmly strike the child between the shoulder blades with the heel of your other hand. Each back blow should be a separate and distinct attempt to dislodge the obstruction.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Would the AAP be strongly opposed to someone striking a child on the back if that was the only way to dislodge the object that the child was choking on?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how do you know i wouldn't kick a rapist or a child molester caught in the act of rape or
molestation? Id certainly kick a teenagers ass if I caught him trying to break into my
property. These types of discussion tend to drag the thread to the level of a tabloid
newspaper, try to provide empirical evidence as you have done before, citing
ref ...[text shortened]... , even as thinkofone and rank outsider are doing, it saves the
thread from becoming personal.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Do you really need to have it pointed out to you that what the AAP is addressing is child discipline and that it is meant in that context?

Honestly. You really need to ask youself why it is so important for you to defend the "right" for adults to strike defenseless children. Seriously, take a step back.

I might use the type of smack you are suggesting where the situation related to something which might otherwise result in severe danger to the child. E.g. the child runs out into the road despite your constant warnings on the matter.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
And if you recall I entered the debate with the statement:

I might use the type of smack you are suggesting where the situation related to something which might otherwise result in severe danger to the child. E.g. the child runs out into the road despite your constant warnings on the matter.

This, as far as I am concerned, has noth ...[text shortened]... '. If I was certain other techniques would be as effective I would use them in preference.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Funny that you should think that there has been no attempt to define the term 'child swatting' when not that long ago I said:

"I would say that the term ‘child swatting’ should be defined as the act of striking a child which:

• is performed with an open hand (i.e. is not a punch and does not involve the use of an implement)
• is not intended t ...[text shortened]... hat this is how it is defined. We are debating actions and consequences, not semantics.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I took it that corporal punishment is 'sickening' for you, with no exceptions. Please correct me if necessary.

Child prodding would be - prodding a child. Perhaps sharply, to draw their attention - in the same manner that 'mild swatting' has been described. Draw from experience or failing that your imagination. Or are you one of those for whom nothi chement are often the ideological fault lines where schools of thought diverge.)

Apologies if I have missed it but has anyone come up with
the difference between "swatting" and "mild swatting" yet?

Also a situation deserving a "swat" and another situation deserving a "mild swat" would be useful.

Thanks

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Apologies if I have missed it but has anyone come up with
the [b]difference between "swatting" and "mild swatting" yet?

Also a situation deserving a "swat" and another situation deserving a "mild swat" would be useful.

Thanks[/b]

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
More than one person has covered these points at exhaustive length ...

Originally posted by wolfgang59

[b]Child prodding would be - prodding a child. Perhaps sharply, to draw their attention - in the same manner that 'mild swatting' has been described. Draw from experience or failing that your imagination. Or are you one of those for whom nothing is real unless it's on Google?
I wouldn't say prodding a child to get their attention was CP - rude, yes ...[text shortened]... ften the ideological fault lines where schools of thought diverge.)[/b]
Too many big words![/b]

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I may have missed one but not several.
Explicitly - what is the difference?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
[b] "If I was certain other techniques would be as effective I would use them in preference"

im pretty sure they dont have a huge problem in sweden with kids getting run over because their parents dont smack them.[/b]

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Your definition was a laudable attempt to get us all talking about the same thing.

I didnt phrase it very well but I was asking for an independent
definition. "Swat" is being thrown around as if it is a common-
place term and I cannot get any definitions for it off the net.
So it looks like it has been made up for this debate and this
debate only.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I wouldn't want to undo the good work performed by bbarr, rank outsider and Lemon Jello by doing your reading for you.