Town Square

Post a New Topic

Sally Lieber spanking bill should finish her off politically

Original post made by kevin on Jan 19, 2007

If you haven't seen yesterday's (thursday's) merky news, you might want to look at this article online -- Web Link -- it's assembly person Sally Lieber's proposal to ban spankings ... make them punishable by a year in jail. Great! The same people who run the DMV want to tell us how to raise our kids. When I read it, I thought here's another kooky idea from Lieber, thank god she's term limited in the legislature and won't be back after this term. Hopefully this idea will finish her off, politically.

Comments (61)

Posted by Surprised, a resident of Southgate
on Jan 19, 2007 at 7:35 am

I was so surprised by this bill. My cousin lives in Maryland - at the two year old check for her daughter, the pediatrician gave her (mom) a handout saying that spanking was "ok" and that the mother should not hesistate to use it as a means of discipline if essential (Ofcourse it talked about the differences between spanking and abuse / the right way to spank etc )

My cousin brought this up with the doctor saying that she was under the impression spanking was illegal ! The doctor said that recent studies have shown that it is indeed a very effective way of discipline ( though , personally I do not agree with it and I do not want this thread to be a debate between the right/wrong spanking)


Posted by woman, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 19, 2007 at 10:57 am

Kevin exaggerates what is being proposed. And he brings in the DMV which indicates the depth of his understanding. Maybe it is therapeutic for him to whack his children. Not to the children, though.


Posted by Rick, a resident of another community
on Jan 19, 2007 at 1:00 pm

Assembly Woman Sally Lieber says we can't hit adults, so we shouldn't spank a child, even to teach them not to run in the street.
Picking up a child against it's will is a form of violence too. We can't do that to adults. Maybe we should outlaw any crossing of a child's will. That will really help the California public schools that are absolutely ruined because of lack of any discipline.


Posted by Amber, a resident of Midtown
on Jan 19, 2007 at 1:02 pm

Sally Lieber doesn't even have children of her own. But she does have a cat and has based her thinking on her vet's advice that she shouldn't ever hit her cat. Keep voting for liberal democrats America…


Posted by Justine, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Jan 19, 2007 at 1:14 pm

I remember being spanked as a kid. I hated it while it was happening but, I should say, that it brought me out of my tantrums and CLOSER to my parents. In other words, it WAS therapeutic. I know it sounds crazy, but it works.


Posted by evolved parent, a resident of Community Center
on Jan 19, 2007 at 1:35 pm

We try to get out children to use their words, instead of expressing anger and unhappiness through lashing out. Tell me, when parents spank their children, how often do they first take the time before the spanking to catch their breath, count to ten, and make sure that their urge to lash out at the child is not simply unchecked anger or an emotional response? And yet, that's the behavior that we ask of our children -- or at least, that's what child behavior experts urge us to ask of our children. We want them to use their words and gain control of their emotional reactions. Ask yourselves: what sort of behavior does spanking model to your kids?


Posted by Sharron, a resident of Palo Verde
on Jan 19, 2007 at 2:25 pm

Evolved parent, I used to believe everything you just said. Then I had three kids. Trying to reason with a two year old is impossible. Time outs don't work, and neither does hugging and looking in the eyes, being soft, being serious, etc. But spanking DOES work.

My kids are now in their teens. My husband and I have a good relationship with them. They know who is in charge, and that we love them. Some of my firends are having a terrible time with their teenagers. They tried to use your approach.

Do you have kids? If so, how many?


Posted by anonymous, a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Jan 19, 2007 at 5:01 pm

Sally Lieber does not have kids. Enough said. She doesn't have enough to do, either.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 19, 2007 at 6:13 pm

Kevin, the spanking of children by their parents should be allowed if you agree to be spanked each time you behave badly.


Posted by Educator/Parent, a resident of Woodside
on Jan 19, 2007 at 6:23 pm

In moderation and with control. spanking may be useful. Please don't demonize those who don't have kids or those who choose to spank. A balanced approached works best.


Posted by Another Voice, a resident of Community Center
on Jan 19, 2007 at 6:37 pm

I was spanked as a kid as were my parents and I found it to be among the most unpleasant of my childhood experiences. As parents we haven't ever found it necessary or beneficial to spank our children and I wish that other parents would feel the same way. However, that's a lot different from criminalizing the choice that other parents may make whether I agree with it or not. We already have well defined laws against child abuse that prohibit physical force which is injurious.

BTY, as a mainstream liberal and proud of it, Sally Lieber does not represent my viewpoints on many issues. Characterizing this proposal of her's as being a "liberal" position seems no more valid than characterizing the positions of Jessie Helms as representing conservatism.


Posted by Parent of 4, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 19, 2007 at 6:55 pm

Spanking children is indeed a can of worms as said in the other thread and this is proving it.

Passing a law isn't going to stop people spanking their children. The good parents who use spanking in the proper way will still continue. The abusive parents will also continue at home. They may stop in public, but their anger or alcoholism, or whatever will only be aggravated and what have been a quick spank on the backside in public could escalate to a beating on the return home. At this stage, any child would have forgotten what the punishment was for.

Spanking, in my opinion, if used properly is a useful discipline (teaching method not punishment). It should be used rarely. I spanked my children for 2 reasons only. Firstly for blatant disobedience to me and secondly for hurting another child either phsyically or emotionally in a deliberate manner. This was always done in private, with explanations of why it was happening. After the tears came there was always a hug and re-inforcement that it was the behavior I didn't like, not the child whom I still loved and would always love.

As always, a good parent learns parenting skills. Parenting skills are not something we are born with, but some of us don't want to improve and learn more. There is always something more that can be learnt and as we all know, raising children is one of the hardest tasks we have.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 19, 2007 at 7:37 pm

'Keep voting for liberal democrats America…' Certainly, Amber, the last six years under a very conservative administration have been so wonderful that they convinced all of us that liberal Democrats are the devil incarnate. The troops coming home from Iraq without limbs, those who don't come home in body bags that is, will be the first ones to tell you how wonderful it is to have a conservative administration and congress. I'll bet you that George Bush used to get spanked a lot as a child, that might explain some things.


Posted by t ames, a resident of another community
on Jan 19, 2007 at 11:25 pm

[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.] This could go down in history as the most stupid bill ever proposed.


Posted by Mary McClane, a resident of another community
on Jan 20, 2007 at 6:35 am

Dear Ms Lieber. Although I support any efforts to reduce the amount of violence against children in this country, I believe that removing a young child's parent for one year is a more serious case of child abuse than having that parent spank the child for misbehaving. If it is truly your intent to address the issue of child abuse, perhaps you should begin by strengthening and enforcing the laws against real abusers like Micheal Devlin and such monsters as John Couey. thank you, Mary McClane, Huntsville, Texas


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Jan 20, 2007 at 7:56 am

So when my cat jumps up on the dinner table i should just tell him to take a time out?
I was spanked as a child, but never twice for the same crime. I learned.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 20, 2007 at 7:59 am

Again, are those in favor of spanking children behaing badly willing to allow others to spank them when they behave badly? Unless the answer is yes, spanking a child, regardless of how badly the parent thinks he'she is behaving, is just a another form of violence.


Posted by Big Willie, a resident of Professorville
on Jan 20, 2007 at 10:47 am

My daughter came home from school and announced that all the kids had been given an 800 number to call if they were abused by their parents. I looked her in the eye and said, "You'll never make it to the phone."


Posted by Not a redneck, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 20, 2007 at 11:40 am

The number of violent, vicious, angry rednecks in this town is disturbing. And surprising. They think they will lose their manhood if they can't beat up children under the age of 3. They probably watch a lot of football and think that's the way to raise children.
I hope Big Willie's daughter pays him back when she gets older. Then he'll wonder about ungrateful children.


Posted by Jeff, a resident of Southgate
on Jan 20, 2007 at 12:01 pm

Sarlat,

Adults get arrested for bad behavior. If they throw a tantrum with the police, they get hit with a billy club, or get tasered. If they act in a threatening manner, they get shot. If I acted badly, I would prefer to get spanked and sent to my room.


Posted by Albert, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 20, 2007 at 12:13 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by LA PediDoc, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 20, 2007 at 1:41 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by bkimmd, a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Jan 20, 2007 at 2:01 pm

The debate is not so much on the merits of spanking. The debate is more about the role of intrusive government, and the minority of people who feel they have the right to impose their beliefs on the rest of us. Whether you believe spanking is abuse or not, there are a substantial number of people, probably the vast majority, who feel it is not, in the majority of cases. The answer lies in education, research and debate, not knee-jerk reactionary and oppressive big-government bans, imposed by a select minority of self-righteous, histrionic crusaders who believe they possess all-encompassing empirical knowledge on the subject.


Posted by Albert, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 20, 2007 at 2:05 pm

Wrong again, I'm afraid, LA PediDo. Young children can't protect themselves from an idiotic parent when they get hit, that's why they need an adult to protect them. The sheer chutzpa and cowardice of an adult hitting a small child who can't protect herself is mind boggling. Our society is not only the most violent in the western world, it also has the highest rate of violence against children, mostly by parents. I can't prove it, but I am certain that some it can be attributed to the mindless obsession by most American males and an alarming number of females with American football, a particularly moronic and ultra-violent 'sport' in which acts of life-threatening and murderous hits and tackles are glorified and their perpetrators become highly payed celebrities and heroes. Many of those who build their lives around this retarded and retarding 'sport', identify with that brand of gladiator violence so much, they practice it on their children. If you can discipline your child only by hitting her, you are unfit to be a parent, and if you feel the urge to hit someone, try to hit a person who can protect himself(like me, for example), and you might lose the urge forever.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 20, 2007 at 2:20 pm

'Whether you believe spanking is abuse or not, there are a substantial number of people, probably the vast majority, who feel it is not, in the majority of cases.'
There was a time when most americans didn't feel there was anything wrong with slavery or the lynching escaped slaves. 65 years ago, most germans didn't think there was anything wrong with exterminating jews. What the majority feels when it comes to violence committed by them is irrelevant. Sometimes there is a need to use government to stop acts of violence and stupidity. Back in 1960's, most southerners considered the use of federal forces to impose racial integration as an act of 'thought police imposing their views on the rest of us'. If it takes the government to eliminate acts of violence by parents against their children, so be it, it's far better than the alternative.


Posted by James, a resident of South of Midtown
on Jan 20, 2007 at 2:36 pm

Sarlat,

65 years ago many leftists in this country thought Stalin was a hero. Many red diaper and pink daper babies still think that socialist intervention in American's lives is a great thing. You sound like one of them. Under the banner of socialism, more people were murdered, in one century, than all of the wars (combined)in recorded human history. Nobody needs a lecture from you about history...especially American parents.

If we want to spank our kids, we will do just that. We should not have our kids exposed to your unbelievably spoiled brats. BTW, where did you send your kids to grammar school in PA?


Posted by LA PediDoc, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 20, 2007 at 2:58 pm

Hey Albert, are you a psychologist? Do you have a degree in, or extensive empirical knowledge, on the human psyche? Are you steeped in knowledge about human behavior and links to violence in the human brain? Even if all of the above is true, your link between sports, like football, and violence in society is a simple-minded, ridiculous generalization. By your reasoning, any bitter, simple-minded tyrant with a crusade to assuage their fragile ego has the right to use government to impose your will on the rest of us. And any reactionary like yourself who thinks other people's actions that you feel are inappropriate, despite not having a clear picture of the overall situation, automatically have the right to act as you see fit, are the type of person that contribute to the march toward tyranny in a society.


Posted by k, a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Jan 20, 2007 at 3:02 pm

everyone, please identify yourself as a parent if you are one. I am a parent and I strongly point out again that Sally Lieber is not - I feel this is a significant point.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 20, 2007 at 3:07 pm

James, i'm not a socialist and i never admired stalin or any other murderous despot like him, i wish i could say the same for you. it's funny that you blabber against socialist intervention in american lives, an imaginary things but say nothing about the alarming attack on our constitutional rights by the criminal bush regime-now here is a true faximile to stalinism since you mention old joe. as far as my kids are concerned, they are anything but spoiled brats, although they were never hit by their parents. both have done volunteer work for poor people in 3rd world countries during their summer vacations and for environmental causes(brazil, angola, mozambique, peru, bolivia), they donate all their birthday gifts and allowences to causes they believe in, they don't do drugs, and just imagine, they became wonderful young people despite never getting spanked by their parents!


Posted by bkimmd, a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Jan 20, 2007 at 3:10 pm

Sarlat, let me get this straight, you are equating spanking a child to the type of violence in society similar to genocide, racial segregation, and slavery? I should not be surprised, wimpy liberal reactionaries have been nothing but shrill lately about how every little offense to them is a matter of the highest type of oppression. Funny how their answer to what scares them is to oppress such behavior with more government tyranny. You even justify it by saying that behavior you and the other moonbats don't agree with have no place, despite the majority agreeing with it. You bring up slavery and genocide. So by your reasoning, I guess since I feel that Democrats weaken our country in so many ways, that it would be OK for the government to wire-tap, spy on, and imprison all Democrats? After all, I'm not the majority, but what the hell, it's justified because Democrats want to exterminate and lynch the conservatives in this country. Am I correct in my reasoning?


Posted by Not a redneck, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 20, 2007 at 3:15 pm

Wrong, k, it doesn't matter whether she is a parent or not. The subject is cruelty to children. Spanking is just a coverup word for the severe punishment some of these guys think they have a right to do to little children. The subject is children under age 3!

If a person is only entitled to opinions about what they have personally experienced, does that mean that anyone who hasn't been in the army can't have an opinion about the war? or older or younger people?
The purpose of an education is to learn things in addition to your own experience.


Posted by LA PediDoc, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 20, 2007 at 3:39 pm

Sarlat, many of us feel that there is one thing worse than violence, on many (but not all) occasions. That is complete, UNIVERSAL, non-violence. The human animal is just that, an animal, just like all the other instinctual creatures that animal-rights nuts like to humanize. As animals, we instinctually understand violence. Spanking children under 3 may be non-productive and violent (I personally find it distasteful), but what if someone used violence to kill Hitler before 1939? Or kill Kim Jong-Il before 8 million people starved to death (instead of sending that moron Carter)? Or take out Stalin after WW2? Or, as of one your ilk had suggested earlier, spanked Bush more often as a child? You complain that slavery was accepted by the majority, or that Nazism was embraced by the majority of Germans (it wasn't, by the way, for most of the Nazi's short history). Well what if you non-violence-under-any circumstance types stopped Lincolm from sending troops to Virginia, or S. Carolina, or Tennessee? UNIVERSAL non-violent philosophy is not only proven worse in many instances thruout history, it's for simple-minded, insecure, and self-serving children.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 20, 2007 at 4:05 pm

LA PediDoc, where did you get that 'UNIVERSAL non-violent philosophy' nonsense? I never believed in it, I'm not a pacifist. I oppose violence against children, which spanking is. A small under-3 child can't protect herself from an adult hitting her. A parent who beats his children is a violent parent who may not deserves to keep his children just like an abusive dog owner who has his pet taken away from him-not everybody should be allowed to own a pet. I have about as much right to spank my children as I have to spank yours. The government also tells us we can't run red lights or build houses that don't meet certain standards, it's inconvenient and an intrusion, but it beats the alternative.


Posted by LA PediDoc, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 20, 2007 at 4:26 pm

"I have about as much right to spank my children as I have to spank yours."

Therein lie the philosophical differences in much of this thread. Many of us feel that I DO have more of a right than a stranger to spank my children (though I never have, although I reserve it as an option, and I'm a Pediatrician). Unlike you, many feel that punishment and violence are not always mutually exclusive. If you are truly not a pacifist, you should understand this point. Violence, whether as a form of motivator for correcting bad behavior, or as a means of protection, is "punishment" in those instances, and is probably the only justification for violence. You obviously cannot differentiate between punishment and violence when it comes to children, but there are many of us, probably most of us, who can, and it is NOT your right, Lieber's right, or the PC California government's right to impose more laws on the entire population because folks like you can't distinguich between punishment and violence when it comes to children. Just like your kids turned out great despite never being spanked, I know plenty of successful, well-adjusted people who were raised in more traditional households who are equally as successful and happy. What gives leftist crusaders like you the right to use government to project your child-raising philosophy on all of us?


Posted by James, a resident of South of Midtown
on Jan 20, 2007 at 5:02 pm

Sarlat,

You seem to support the Lieber legilation, which could put away a mother for 1 year for swatting her kids' butts, and you claim that you are not a socialist. Hmmm..., you seem to come straight out of Stockholm central casting. Nothing imaginary about that.

You are clearly a Bush hater. I didn't vote for him (I voted for Kerry), but I don't hate him. Saddam needed to be dealt with sooner or later...Bush botched the job, but Kerry would probably have done worse. Same thing for Hillary, whom I will probably vote for next time.

Speaking of Hillary and Bill, did they ever give Chelsea a swat on the butt?

All of my kids did volunteer work, similar to your kids, although not as extensively (apparently). And they all got spanked, mostly by wy wife, but also by me on occasion. On one occasion, the principal of the school called me up and told me that one of my kids had bad-mouthed a teacher. He never did that again.

Most of the kids I know that are not spanked by their parents are spoiled brats - even if their parents claim otherwise.


Posted by sarlat, a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 20, 2007 at 5:24 pm

LA PediDoc, it is absoutely my right to pr0tect your children from you when you use violence against her, or 'punishment'as you call it. I would intervene if I happened to see your wife attacked by hoolums, there's no fundamental difference. I would do the same if I caught you kicking your dog as 'punishment'. Believe me, you would never kick your dog again. Once your kids or mine are out of their mothers womb, they are not some propety of ours you can spank when you seem it appropriate. I support the use of violence, aka self defense if my country is directly attacked or as a form self defense when one is physically attacked. Spanking a child is a form of violence, and you can't finess your way around it. Violence against those who can't protect themselves rom it and didn't consent to it is the worst form of violence. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Milsda1, a resident of Los Altos
on Jan 20, 2007 at 5:46 pm

Sariat, You are wrong, you have no right to interfere in how I discipline my children. Spanking can be acceptable as a disciplinary measure as long as it's not done in anger. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by Comsense, a resident of another community
on Jan 21, 2007 at 12:27 am

No matter how I feel about this subject, I have no right to tell anyone how to raise their child.

When my son was two years old, we were in a park. My son kept making a beeline for the nearby driveway. After twice talking to him patiently, and explaining he could be hit by a car, he continues his behavior. So instead of taking the chance of him getting flattened by an SUV, I gave him a nice swat on his behind and explained he could expect more of the same if he kept it up. He's 17 now, happy, an honors student, we get along great, ect..... So don't tell me what to do. Does a 3 year old want to get spanked? No... they don't want to eat spinich, or brush their teeth, or go to bed early...but thats life. If you don't feel you want to spank your kids ever, I fully back your right to think that way.

Thanks.


Posted by Bik Willie, a resident of Professorville
on Jan 21, 2007 at 8:02 am

"The number of violent, vicious, angry rednecks in this town is disturbing. And surprising. They think they will lose their manhood if they can't beat up children under the age of 3. They probably watch a lot of football and think that's the way to raise children.

I hope Big Willie's daughter pays him back when she gets older. Then he'll wonder about ungrateful children.

Posted by Not a redneck"

You just got Punk'd. Your content and signature indicate you feel you're a member of the ruling class. Try to develop a sense of humor.


Posted by Albert, a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jan 21, 2007 at 8:55 am

The running of red lights has become an epidemic in PA. Does that mean I should spank drivers who run red lights, don't get caught by the police(they hardly ever do) and pose mortal danger to the public, or are adults exluded from spanking for bad behavior?
My guess is that Big Willie is someone who watches Rambo movies and a lot of football(and probably drives a Hummer) and is terribly frustrated he can't shoot lots of foreigners and maim other football players, so he gets his manhood validated by hitting, sorry, disciplining, his kids.


Posted by Raj, a resident of another community
on Jan 21, 2007 at 11:28 am

There are already laws against child abuse/injury. This law
is about legislating morality, not preventing harm.

People who think a spanked uninjured child is better off
with its parent in jail are simply nuts. As nuts
as thinking Elian Gonzales would be better off without his dad,
based on the economic/political conditions in Cuba!!!

Again, this law has nothing to do with those parents who beat
their kids black-and-blue or anything even remotely close to that.




Posted by Big Willie, a resident of Professorville
on Jan 21, 2007 at 11:56 am

" My guess is that Big Willie is someone who watches Rambo movies and a lot of football(and probably drives a Hummer) and is terribly frustrated he can't shoot lots of foreigners and maim other football players, so he gets his manhood validated by hitting, sorry, disciplining, his kids.

Posted by Albert,"

You'd be wrong Albert because you've been Punk'd.


Posted by Steve, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jan 22, 2007 at 9:51 am

I don't live in California, but it seems that if it happens in Cali, it will spread across the Nation.

I would like to know if Ms. Sally Lieber has any children of her own? If so, who raises them?

To put forth a proposal to force perents to stop spanking their children is in-sane. Plus to impose heavy fines and jail time to parents who break this law? Is she trying to increase the states dependancy on the foster care system? Where will the kids go, while their parents are in jail?

Also where will they go with their kids after they get out? Their house will have been forclosed on, their personal belongings belong to the neighborhood now, And they can't get a job because they have a criminal record now.

Hey Sally... STUPID!!!


Posted by interested person, a resident of another community
on Jan 22, 2007 at 12:44 pm

For the record, Ms. Lieber has no children and, according to her government website info, she states no credentials or professional (non-legislative) experience in early childhood development, juvenile law, ethics, education or medicine.

Here's her own website biography information: "Sally represents the 22nd District, considered the 'Heart of Silicon Valley,' where she lives with her husband David. They are proud to be active in neighborhood and community activities, enjoy hiking and windsurfing and take seriously their role as pet guardians for a politically astute black-and-white cat." It does not say where she was educated or what she did before entering politics.


Posted by Christina, a resident of Community Center
on Jan 22, 2007 at 4:38 pm

Spanking in and within itself probably shouldn't qualify as an act of child abuse. However, my research indicates that there are many documented incidents around the world where an act of simple disciplinary spanking got out of hand and ended up as extreme and even deadly child abuse. The act of hitting, even light spanking, causes a rush of adrenalin to the brain. Sometimes this rush makes aan angry angrier and more likely to lose of control. Imagine a parent spanking a child because of incessant yelling or crying and that child actually accelerating the crying and yelling because of the spanking. The spanking parent gets angrier and more violent and things get out of hand. A proper analogy would be of simple arguments over a parking space that ended up in fatal shootings. Obviously, most parents who spank their children for misbehaving will never let it deteriorate into extreme violence against the child, but it happens more often than most people would like to believe. Even one incident is too many. We live in an extremely violent society so maybe it's time we devised ways to discipline children without spanking them.


Posted by Pritesh, a resident of Meadow Park
on Jan 22, 2007 at 5:36 pm

She has nothing better to do then bringing this kind or crap and wasting taxpayers money. Sally Lieber there are so many other improtant topics that you need to focus on. You who don't have kids and don't know what it takes to raise one, should not be bringing this kind of bills. I am do not like kids being spanked but I DO NOT want government telling me and specially someone like you SALLY LIEBERE. So please back off and use your time in being more productive things.


Posted by Christina, a resident of another community
on Jan 22, 2007 at 7:24 pm

No one has the right to tell us how to raise our kids. This is just outright stupid. If I need to spank my child as a form of discapline that is my business. In the Bible it says to discapline your child, and if you need to spank them then you should.I only use spankings for more serious behavior situations,but time outs and talking dont always work. As a Christian I believe spanking is ok, and God says it is to. So know you are involving Religon. For example children immunizations. If its against your Religon you dont have to have your child have there immunizations to enter school or daycare.And by this not happening other kids could be at risk of getting ill as some children dont have their immunizations, but at the same time I understand as it is there Religon belief. Well it is my religon belief that it is ok to spank my child if needed as a form of discapline, and no one will take my rights away. Just like no one will tell me what religon to be. I thought we lived in a free country which no one will tell a parent how to raise there child. I am a strict parent because I care about my child, and if giving my child a spanking gets the point accross then that is what I will do.And the bible dosnt believe in abusing your child, and a spankin isnt abuse. We need to focus on protecting our children from preditors that just get out of jail and do it again. No one seems to be doing much about them.


Posted by MOM of 1-year old, a resident of Los Altos
on Jan 23, 2007 at 1:26 am

I am totally against spanking in principle and hope i never have to resort to it for my toddler. I remember getting spanked as a kid and I am still bitter about it - it takes away a little bit of your dignity as a human being. I have read a great many studies which state that hitting your kids ain't good for ANYBODY, no matter what Jesus said a long time ago. Howevvvvver, taking a parent away from his/her children and putting them in jail for some type of spanking would be far worse and traumatic for the child. Will the parent be a better parent once he/she gets out of jail?? I think he/she is more likely to abuse because he/she will be a more angry/broken person. Maybe just teaching parents to count to 20 before the urge to strike would go further.

Most parents are trying hard to be good parents, but there are a lot of frustrations in life which we end up taking out on the most defenseless creatures. I remember recently, I had a very bad morning and when my 10-month old started fussing, I almost yelled at him. Then i realized what I was doing and stopped and gave him a hug and a silent apology. I now realize how easy it can be to take out your frustrations on a helpless little baby. Parenting is hard job, (esp in a society where moms/families don't get much support) and we need help, not punishment.

While it is nice that Sally wants to help the precious helpless, I think she could be working on more productive/realistic ways to help young kids - maybe beefing up child protective services so they can respond appropriately to each case of abuse (and there is lot of it unfortunately.)


Posted by MOM of 1-year old, a resident of Los Altos
on Jan 23, 2007 at 1:27 am

I am totally against spanking in principle and hope i never have to resort to it for my toddler. I remember getting spanked as a kid and I am still bitter about it - it takes away a little bit of your dignity as a human being. I have read a great many studies which state that hitting your kids ain't good for ANYBODY, no matter what Jesus said a long time ago. Howevvvvver, taking a parent away from his/her children and putting them in jail for some type of spanking would be far worse and traumatic for the child. Will the parent be a better parent once he/she gets out of jail?? I think he/she is more likely to abuse because he/she will be a more angry/broken person. Maybe just teaching parents to count to 20 before the urge to strike would go further.

Most parents are trying hard to be good parents, but there are a lot of frustrations in life which we end up taking out on the most defenseless creatures. I remember recently, I had a very bad morning and when my 10-month old started fussing, I almost yelled at him. Then i realized what I was doing and stopped and gave him a hug and a silent apology. I now realize how easy it can be to take out your frustrations on a helpless little baby. Parenting is hard job, (esp in a society where moms/families don't get much support) and we need help, not punishment.

While it is nice that Sally wants to help the precious helpless, I think she could be working on more productive/realistic ways to help young kids - maybe beefing up child protective services so they can respond appropriately to each case of abuse (and there is lot of it unfortunately.)


Posted by SilverBullet, a resident of Midtown
on Jan 23, 2007 at 8:45 am

Albert: I find your assertion regarding football to be rediculous and offensive. What evidence do you have of this? I've been a huge football fan since I was 10. I have 2 kids and I've never hit any of them. Obviously you know nothing about they way football is played. Have you ever noticed that after the game, players and coaches from opposing sides can be seen shaking hands, hugging and congratulating each other? Have you ever seen a player tackle another player, then help that player up? Football isn't just about tackling. Its about endurance, strategy, finess and determination. Since you call it "American Football," I sense that the heart of your argument is that America is bad, and the rest of the world is so civilized. Did "American Football" inspire genocide in Rawanda? How about Darfur or Bosnia? Were Hitler or Stalin big fans of football? How is football that different than rugby? How about hockey? Commie-ball (i.e., soccer) isn't necessarily non-violent either. I love when soccer players trip and then roll around as if they've been horribly injured. How about baseball?


Posted by Shane, a resident of Palo Verde
on Jan 23, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Here is an example of modern parenting:

Web Link

This kid should have been paddled and put in her seat, period. The airline should fine the parents for refusing to control the kid, and delaying the flight.


Posted by anon, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jan 23, 2007 at 1:34 pm

I gather the parents are acting as the injured party in this situation (I caught part of the story on Good Morning America today).They are bad-mouthing the particular airline where the "situation" occurred.


Posted by Shane, a resident of Palo Verde
on Jan 23, 2007 at 3:15 pm

Anon,

That wouldn't surprise me. The parents were probably not spanked when they were kids, so they have grown up with a spoilt brat sense of entitlement.


Posted by Draw the Line, a resident of Stanford
on Jan 23, 2007 at 5:26 pm

The blood of the first child who dies from running into the street, touching an electrical plug, not stopping cold when mom yells "stop", or running away in a store will be on the hands of this woman and anybody who votes this in.

Children will rapidly learn that there is no consequence in public. Each of mine tested me..once..in public, by running away to "hide" or into a street, when they were toddlers far too young to be reasoned with or to understand that "ok, young man, no dessert for you tonight".

A swat on their little diapered bottoms and a loud "no" may have saved their lives later.


Posted by EB, a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 24, 2007 at 5:58 pm

I am a mother of two small children. This bill is problematic on so many levels. Spanking, while far from ideal, can be useful in dangerous situations where you need your child to stop his behavior asap. Running in the street, reaching for the stove, and unbuckling their car seat are examples where spanking may be effective.

I think it should be left to parents to determine the best form of discipline to use. Government certainly has an obligation to protect children from abuse but to equate a swat on the bottom to abuse is just wrong. Ms. Leiber has no children of her own and more importantly no background in child development or medicine.

E



Posted by Lori, a resident of another community
on Jan 27, 2007 at 6:39 am

To Everyone,
After reading several of the comments posted; Its easy to see the illogical reasoning that has taken place.
First and foremost: Ask yourself this question, Am I willing to succumb my "God given rights" as a free person to the government?
(God given rights refers to the United States Consitution) If so, then allow yourselves to be slaves of the federal government. To be controlled by the government in everything you do. My question on this issue is; WHY DID SALLY LIEBERS VET HAVE TO TELL HER NOT TO HIT HER CAT? Since she uses this as an example for the "do not spank bill" i wondered if she was repermanded by her vet for hitting her cat. Or was that a spanking?
Lori


Posted by my opinion, a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jan 27, 2007 at 8:43 am

I think the issue is a real one: a few parents are bullies, or have anger management problems, and beat up on their children under the guise of displine before their children can even talk.

How can children be protected from those parents, who will hide the violence of their behavior behind their 'right' to discipline and raise their children as they see fit.

I doubt that any one would be arrested, or convicted, or reprimanded for an occasional disciplinary swat on the butt to their kid. But, I would like to hear ideas on how assault against defenseless innocents (masked as discipline, or a personal right) can be prevented while protecting parenting options.


Posted by granpachuck, a resident of Palo Alto Hills
on Apr 11, 2008 at 8:25 pm

Okay it is a year later and she is still at. So much for saying this would finish this girl.

See our latest email to us from California for Children and Families (CCF)
Web Link


Posted by Peter, a resident of another community
on Apr 11, 2008 at 8:39 pm

Lori, God didn't give us our rights, a group of very smart, very dedicated men who thought beyond the political philosophy and practices of the time to devise a revolutionary document that sought to guarantee in law what they saw as inalienable rights due every human being.


Posted by jim, a resident of Stanford
on Apr 23, 2008 at 2:17 pm

Did everyone also know that in Aprl 2008 Sally Lieber tried to propose a bill that says she wants public spankings for repeat offenders and to top it off, she wants the victim to do the paddling.... What kind of joke is that....

Everyone who doesnt like her should help out and get rid of this lady by getting her fired, it seems that she is into her own beliefs and not the people. She is no good and should never be in any political office ever again.


Posted by jim, a resident of Stanford
on Apr 23, 2008 at 2:17 pm

Did everyone also know that in Aprl 2008 Sally Lieber tried to propose a bill that says she wants public spankings for repeat offenders and to top it off, she wants the victim to do the paddling.... What kind of joke is that....

Everyone who doesnt like her should help out and get rid of this lady by getting her fired, it seems that she is into her own beliefs and not the people. She is no good and should never be in any political office ever again.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Scott’s Seafood Mountain View to close, reopen as new concept
By Elena Kadvany | 13 comments | 4,077 views

How Bad Policy Happens
By Douglas Moran | 21 comments | 1,390 views

The life of Zarf
By Sally Torbey | 8 comments | 1,036 views

When Grandparents Visit
By Cheryl Bac | 4 comments | 727 views

Freshman Blues Don't Mean Wrong College
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 653 views