Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Kid's Corporal Punishment - a Risk to Mental Health
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Paidiske" data-source="post: 77649693" data-attributes="member: 386627"><p>That seemed to be very much your claim. But if it's not, why on earth have we spent so much time talking about distress?</p><p></p><p>At the end of the day, an abuser chooses to abuse. They make this choice based on their beliefs, attitudes and values. That is the cause. Change those beliefs, attitudes and values, and they will not abuse!</p><p></p><p>How can you talk about "factors that contribute to abuse," and "why people abuse," and then deny that you are talking about causes?</p><p></p><p>But even there, you have to admit that it is ultimately about shaping attitudes and beliefs. </p><p></p><p>In which post did I originally post it?</p><p></p><p>Not at all true. We can measure parental beliefs directly.</p><p></p><p>That's not really correct. Sure, our experiences and the things which form our beliefs vary, but there are particular causes. We can see this in the way that people are influenced by social and cultural norms, or by what they are taught. </p><p></p><p>It was relevant because you were claiming that abuse was caused by parents' irrational beliefs. And you linked articles talking about irrational beliefs. So I asked, what are those studies of "irrational beliefs" actually measuring, and are they the same beliefs which underpin abuse, and on examination, discovered that no, they are mostly not. So you cannot take articles talking about "irrational beliefs" in parents as directly relevant to abuse. </p><p></p><p>But "demandingness" is not enough, on its own, to underpin the physical abuse of children. </p><p></p><p>This is just nonsense. As if there is no other form of irrational belief than those four measures. And yet there are many. But the really key thing here is, those four core beliefs do not cover the set of beliefs which drive abuse. </p><p></p><p>And yet earlier in this very post you were saying they don't cause abuse! And you wonder why I find your position inconsistent and rather incoherent. </p><p></p><p>I'm not claiming that. But I'm claiming that another source, citing this article as establishing something about abuse, when this article is clearly not about abuse, looks dodgy at best. </p><p></p><p>Not at all. </p><p></p><p>I'm not casting aspersions. I'm making no value judgement, just a statement of fact. </p><p></p><p>That's not what I said. I said that the beliefs which justify corporal punishment which the law does not deem abusive, are basically the same beliefs which justify physically abusive corporal punishment. </p><p></p><p>I meant specifically ignorant of the law. </p><p></p><p>In denial of what, exactly? Is it "denial" to decide that the lawmakers have got it wrong on this particular point, and that you are going to do as you see fit? </p><p></p><p>But they don't see it as damage. They see it as good and necessary parenting. And that isn't necessarily coming from an "unreal" and distressed place, at all. </p><p></p><p>I had to explain it to you earlier in the thread! I'm not going back to find posts. But I'm not going to be gaslit by you pretending that part of the conversation didn't happen. </p><p></p><p>I have never talked about primary prevention as "awareness programmes." It is absolutely about changing beliefs and attitudes. That is what primary prevention work is. </p><p></p><p>I've never agreed that these attitudes and beliefs are caused by "practical conditions." They're largely social and cultural norms. </p><p></p><p>A complete caricature of what primary prevention work might look like. </p><p></p><p>Really no. If you make them less stressed and better resourced, unless that therapy is challenging the beliefs and attitudes which drive abuse, they will just be less stressed, better resourced abusers. </p><p></p><p>But hope and empowerment and positivity don't prevent abuse! Someone can be a hopeful, empowered, positive abuser. As long as they hold the core beliefs which underpin abuse, they will keep feeling justified in what they are doing. </p><p></p><p>Clearly a bad thing, since it is what drives abuse in our culture. </p><p></p><p>Why would they be a suspect, unless there were some evidence of abuse occurring? </p><p></p><p>You might remember that earlier in the thread, I suggested that a questionnaire looking at these specific beliefs would be a much better predictor of the risk of abuse, than some of the other measures being discussed. I could see a situation where, say, new parents who scored highly on all those beliefs were flagged for early support and intervention. </p><p></p><p>That's not necessarily interrogation. But it would be much more effective than stereotyping people based on their household structure or socioeconomic status. </p><p></p><p>Each would need to be examined on its merits. Clearly in this thread we are largely discussing household hierarchies, and when it comes to parents and children, to some extent that's necessary, but how do we help parents to exercise necessary power, control and authority in healthy and nurturing ways, rather than abusive ways? That's a really pertinent question. </p><p></p><p>That belief in hierarchy underpins abuse is a fact; is reality. </p><p></p><p>So you see that I do understand your model. I just see it as completely false. (Nor do I believe that this is the model for "every other social problem").</p><p></p><p>I am rejecting your particular model where "They have to be primed to want to abuse others and anyone primed to abuse others has psychological issues that cause them to turn abuse into something good."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Paidiske, post: 77649693, member: 386627"] That seemed to be very much your claim. But if it's not, why on earth have we spent so much time talking about distress? At the end of the day, an abuser chooses to abuse. They make this choice based on their beliefs, attitudes and values. That is the cause. Change those beliefs, attitudes and values, and they will not abuse! How can you talk about "factors that contribute to abuse," and "why people abuse," and then deny that you are talking about causes? But even there, you have to admit that it is ultimately about shaping attitudes and beliefs. In which post did I originally post it? Not at all true. We can measure parental beliefs directly. That's not really correct. Sure, our experiences and the things which form our beliefs vary, but there are particular causes. We can see this in the way that people are influenced by social and cultural norms, or by what they are taught. It was relevant because you were claiming that abuse was caused by parents' irrational beliefs. And you linked articles talking about irrational beliefs. So I asked, what are those studies of "irrational beliefs" actually measuring, and are they the same beliefs which underpin abuse, and on examination, discovered that no, they are mostly not. So you cannot take articles talking about "irrational beliefs" in parents as directly relevant to abuse. But "demandingness" is not enough, on its own, to underpin the physical abuse of children. This is just nonsense. As if there is no other form of irrational belief than those four measures. And yet there are many. But the really key thing here is, those four core beliefs do not cover the set of beliefs which drive abuse. And yet earlier in this very post you were saying they don't cause abuse! And you wonder why I find your position inconsistent and rather incoherent. I'm not claiming that. But I'm claiming that another source, citing this article as establishing something about abuse, when this article is clearly not about abuse, looks dodgy at best. Not at all. I'm not casting aspersions. I'm making no value judgement, just a statement of fact. That's not what I said. I said that the beliefs which justify corporal punishment which the law does not deem abusive, are basically the same beliefs which justify physically abusive corporal punishment. I meant specifically ignorant of the law. In denial of what, exactly? Is it "denial" to decide that the lawmakers have got it wrong on this particular point, and that you are going to do as you see fit? But they don't see it as damage. They see it as good and necessary parenting. And that isn't necessarily coming from an "unreal" and distressed place, at all. I had to explain it to you earlier in the thread! I'm not going back to find posts. But I'm not going to be gaslit by you pretending that part of the conversation didn't happen. I have never talked about primary prevention as "awareness programmes." It is absolutely about changing beliefs and attitudes. That is what primary prevention work is. I've never agreed that these attitudes and beliefs are caused by "practical conditions." They're largely social and cultural norms. A complete caricature of what primary prevention work might look like. Really no. If you make them less stressed and better resourced, unless that therapy is challenging the beliefs and attitudes which drive abuse, they will just be less stressed, better resourced abusers. But hope and empowerment and positivity don't prevent abuse! Someone can be a hopeful, empowered, positive abuser. As long as they hold the core beliefs which underpin abuse, they will keep feeling justified in what they are doing. Clearly a bad thing, since it is what drives abuse in our culture. Why would they be a suspect, unless there were some evidence of abuse occurring? You might remember that earlier in the thread, I suggested that a questionnaire looking at these specific beliefs would be a much better predictor of the risk of abuse, than some of the other measures being discussed. I could see a situation where, say, new parents who scored highly on all those beliefs were flagged for early support and intervention. That's not necessarily interrogation. But it would be much more effective than stereotyping people based on their household structure or socioeconomic status. Each would need to be examined on its merits. Clearly in this thread we are largely discussing household hierarchies, and when it comes to parents and children, to some extent that's necessary, but how do we help parents to exercise necessary power, control and authority in healthy and nurturing ways, rather than abusive ways? That's a really pertinent question. That belief in hierarchy underpins abuse is a fact; is reality. So you see that I do understand your model. I just see it as completely false. (Nor do I believe that this is the model for "every other social problem"). I am rejecting your particular model where "They have to be primed to want to abuse others and anyone primed to abuse others has psychological issues that cause them to turn abuse into something good." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Kid's Corporal Punishment - a Risk to Mental Health
Top
Bottom