taxman Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 What , for giving his kids a smack when they step out of line ? complete over reaction if you ask me. Punishment leaving red marks, concealing a pregnancy, dominating his wife and children. "Rotherham Council social workers raised concerns about his parenting skills and determination to have ‘total control’ over his family," "In the most recent hearing in Sheffield the court was told both parents had been ‘uncooperative and obstructive’ with professionals, culminating in their bid to keep E’s birth a secret." "The judge said the father ‘must feel in control’ and was capable of rude, uncompromising and hostile in his determination to get his own way." Sounds like a nutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Punishment leaving red marks, concealing a pregnancy, dominating his wife and children. "Rotherham Council social workers raised concerns about his parenting skills and determination to have ‘total control’ over his family," "In the most recent hearing in Sheffield the court was told both parents had been ‘uncooperative and obstructive’ with professionals, culminating in their bid to keep E’s birth a secret." "The judge said the father ‘must feel in control’ and was capable of rude, uncompromising and hostile in his determination to get his own way." Sounds like a nutter. The judge? I don't think I would cooperate with the so called professionals that work in RMBC social services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Oil Man Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 This seems a bit strong to me, losing your kids for smacking them and leaving no lasting marks? http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local/rotherham-dad-who-believes-in-smacking-children-has-son-and-daughter-removed-from-family-home-1-7180062 Theres got to be more than this to it. I realise the Star cant print every single detail but from what i see it looks like Rotherham are going overboard in the light of the sex abuse scandal just to show they have a handle on things. I hope the social workers the court relied on were different social workers to ones who let all those kids get raped over the last god knows how many years. Big people cannot hit little people, no matter what the little person has done. It is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Sounds like a nutter. He only sounds like a nutter if you read all of the words in the article. Perhaps Penny limited himself to the big letters at the top of the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeh Posted March 29, 2015 Author Share Posted March 29, 2015 Personal attacks only weaken your own position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Personal attacks only weaken your own position. Not in this case. I'm right, he's wrong. That's all you need to know. You are "new" around here, aren't you:suspect: Maybe you haven't noticed yet, that Penny's name is a syllable too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Replace beating with reasonable physical chastisement. Where does it say this man 'beat' his kids? Ok replace the word's, but when is physical chastisement ever reasonable or right. You would never treat an adult in such a way so why would you treat a child that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Ok replace the word's, but when is physical chastisement ever reasonable or right. You would never treat an adult in such a way so why would you treat a child that way. I have witnessed the police hitting adults because hitting them was the best way to deal with their unruly behaviour, hitting someone is necessarily wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Replace beating with reasonable physical chastisement. Where does it say this man 'beat' his kids? Does "reasonable physical chastisement" result in red marks? Sounds more like assault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smog Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Reasonable chastisement is legal. Not disciplining your children properly is not. I have friends who started out not smacking their first child, on principle, and because she really didn't need it, and then resorted to smacking for their feisty second child as this was the only way they found that she listened. Teaching my youngest not to run away whilst we were outside did need a smack on the hand, as "no" to some two year olds does need reinforcement. The worst punishment that I remember from childhood, was my dad taking a lolly away and stamping on it, it was cruel and bothered me much more than a smack. There are more damaging ways to discipline kids than smacking, which leave far worse scars. This dad sounds a tyrant, so I think that it is as well that he has lost his kids, hopefully they'll go to a loving home. ---------- Post added 29-03-2015 at 19:41 ---------- Try smacking without leaving a red mark. Kids do far worse to each other in the yard anyway, without being smacked at home usually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now