Soap in the Mouth....

[lhancock90]

This is news and debates. Strong opinions should be expected. Not everyone will agree but perhaps, if you take offence, avoid the section?

 

[Andypanda6570]

This is news and debates. Strong opinions should be expected. Not everyone will agree but perhaps, if you take offence, avoid the section?

Your absolutely right. The thing is it STOPS being a debate when you insult your opponent . There is definitely a way to get your point across without making people feel like shit, I know , i do it everyday. But you are right and that is just what I am going to do now

 

[Dragonfly]

Some posters need dragging into perspective with a visit or two to victims of real abuse.

What's "real abuse"?

It would need to satisfy severity and duration, neither which are present with soap and to a smaller element intention too. No authority would institutionalize a kid on a one-off incident like this.

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Mom-Arrested-for-Washing-Kids-Mouth-With-Soap--64112132.html

Quote "A Palm Bay woman and her boyfriend were arrested Monday for child abuse after the couple went old school to punish their 8-year-old daughter for swearing.

They washed her mouth out with soap."

 

[Piper84]

This is news and debates. Strong opinions should be expected. Not everyone will agree but perhaps, if you take offence, avoid the section?

Your absolutely right. The thing is it STOPS being a debate when you insult your opponent . There is definitely a way to get your point across without making people feel like shit, I know , i do it everyday. But you are right and that is just what I am going to do now

That hasn't happened. I've seen plenty of people CLAIMING they've been insulted, albeit indirectly, because a lot of people have said the act of force-feeding a child soap is abusive and they feel insulted on behalf of their parents/guardians. That's not the same thing.

 

[Lina]

Some posters need dragging into perspective with a visit or two to victims of real abuse.

What's "real abuse"?

It would need to satisfy severity and duration, neither which are present with soap and to a smaller element intention too. No authority would institutionalize a kid on a one-off incident like this.

And if it was done over a long period of time?

Well, from reading personal accounts in this discussion, it doesn't seem to have taken very long to correct behaviour. I highly doubt that this type of action lasts any length of time to cause damage and elicit the label "abuse".

Dragonfly, the link you posted isn't representative at all. I very much doubt that most parents leave soap sitting in the child's mouth for 10 minutes.

 

[Dragonfly]

I dont know the ins and outs of how you do it as its not something I would do. However its classed as abuse then after a certain amount of time say 10 mins? is that correct?

 

[Piper84]

Well, from reading personal accounts in this discussion, it doesn't seem to have taken very long to correct behaviour. I highly doubt that this type of action lasts any length of time to cause damage and elicit the label "abuse".

Dragonfly, the link you posted isn't representative at all. I very much doubt that most parents leave soap sitting in the child's mouth for 10 minutes.

I find it hard to take what you say as gospel because different authorities all over the country seem to have vastly differing ideas on what constitutes child endangerment (certain political party membership, for example). I also don't think you're in a position to say what "most" parents do with their children when they force them to ingest soap as you don't seem to have much experience of it.

I'm surprised that you're not referring to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which expressly states feeding children soap is an abuse of those rights.

 

[Dragonfly]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/hot-sauce-mom-jessica-beagley-found-guilty-child/story?id=14366615 Hot sauce mum found guilty to.

 

[TriChick]

This is news and debates. Strong opinions should be expected. Not everyone will agree but perhaps, if you take offence, avoid the section?

Strong opinions are always expected in the Debates section, I agree. However, I think that someone should be able to participate yet still reserve the right to express themselves if they feel personally offended. Personally, I don't think that participation should require one to check their feelings at the door. I've been involved in a lot of debates on here, but have never seen one quite so hostile and don't think this represents the section as a whole.

 

[Piper84]

You can't have seen many FF vs BF or circumcision debates then.

 

[My_First]

Dragonfly, all of those links, (especially the hot sauce), had MUCH more going on than whats being discussed here. She wasn't found guilty of hot sauce, it was cold showers etc etc. What you have posted reads like a daily Mail headline, pick for shock value, and ask questions later.

The soap was 10 mins which INDUCED VOMITING - so much so that she had to go to the hospital, yes thats abuse. A quick 2 second scrub on the tongue, where is the people charged with that?

 

[Kess]

I can see why robinator was surprised that someone would call social services for someone putting soap in their kid's mouth...tbh I'm not sure they'd do anything about it at all here.

I think that's a big part of the debate tbh, differing cultures. In northern Europe, remember, corporal punishment of any type is generally frowned upon, and illegal in many countries. The "wuppin's" I have seen mentioned on American talk shows (normally someone in the audience advocating one for the rebellious teen on stage) and TV shows and much of the corporal punishment I've read about on US forums would be considered abuse here and would easily get children removed by social services. I understand many people in the US do not use corporal punishment but it seems to be more something other people keep out of, so individual parents choose whether to use it or not and that right is considered paramount. It also seems to be a big part of some subcultures in the US, especially paddling or switching. England and Wales, any punishment that breaks the skin even slightly is illegal, and in Scotland any corporal punishment at all is illegal.

I think it's very possible to consider an action abusive without placing fault on the person doing it. By the standards of our day, many people in history were mysoginist, violent, abusive, etc, but I doubt there were any more evil people then than now. We now know their actions were wrong, but they were doing the best they knew how with the information they had available, for good intentions. Most of the victims would also not have considered themselves victims, for example many women had happy marriages despite being controlled and restricted in a way that would be considered emotional abuse today, not to mention the fact they had no ability to refuse their husband "his marital rights".

If someone's culture, knowledge, generation, upbringing, etc, tell them that putting soap in a child's mouth is a good discipline strategy, I wouldn't judge that person harshly. I would, however, label the action itself as abusive.

 

[Lina]

Well, from reading personal accounts in this discussion, it doesn't seem to have taken very long to correct behaviour. I highly doubt that this type of action lasts any length of time to cause damage and elicit the label "abuse".

Dragonfly, the link you posted isn't representative at all. I very much doubt that most parents leave soap sitting in the child's mouth for 10 minutes.

I find it hard to take what you say as gospel because different authorities all over the country seem to have vastly differing ideas on what constitutes child endangerment (certain political party membership, for example). I also don't think you're in a position to say what "most" parents do with their children when they force them to ingest soap as you don't seem to have much experience of it.

I'm surprised that you're not referring to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which expressly states feeding children soap is an abuse of those rights.

You are right, I have no experience of it, but neither do you. The difference is that I'm not dismissive of the experiences of others in the quest to box them up as victims of abuse.

You keep referring to the UN convention which isn't even recognised in the US and the whole organisation is largely irrelevant in the world.

 

[Dragonfly]

Dragonfly, all of those links, (especially the hot sauce), had MUCH more going on than whats being discussed here. She wasn't found guilty of hot sauce, it was cold showers etc etc. What you have posted reads like a daily Mail headline, pick for shock value, and ask questions later.

The soap was 10 mins which INDUCED VOMITING - so much so that she had to go to the hospital, yes thats abuse. A quick 2 second scrub on the tongue, where is the people charged with that?

Thats what I asked earlier was there a time limit to this that made it not abuse turn in to abuse. Kinda shocking that. To me just that one act isnt good, never mind the stories in the media.

 

[Jaylynne]

You can't have seen many FF vs BF or circumcision debates then.

Do you come looking for fights? Many of your posts in other threads are quite heated as well.

And I was never force fed soap. Ever. Nor was I a toddler when it was done. My parents would never dream of using hot sauce. Now that is vile.

 

[Piper84]

You are right, I have no experience of it, but neither do you. The difference is that I'm not dismissive of the experiences of others in the quest to box them up as victims of abuse.

You keep referring to the UN convention which isn't even recognised in the US and the whole organisation is largely irrelevant in the world.

You don't know about my experiences of it. Just because I'm not on here pouring my heart out doesn't mean I have "no experience" of it.

I've never called anyone a victim of abuse, but I have called the practice abusive.

The United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child binds its signatory countries by international law, so it is not "largely irrelevant in the world". What a ridiculous statement to make. Only two countries in the world have not ratified it: the USA and Somalia. That really says it all.

 

[TriChick]

You can't have seen many FF vs BF or circumcision debates then.

An incorrect asssumption once again. I have been involved in many.

With even the most outspoken mothers on this forum, I have yet to see many who speak to others the way you have, to be perfectly honest.

 

[Piper84]

You can't have seen many FF vs BF or circumcision debates then.

An incorrect asssumption once again. I have been involved in many.

With even the most outspoken mothers on this forum, I have yet to see many who speak to others the way you have, to be perfectly honest.

Then let's just sit back and wait until the thread gets closed like the ones on circumcision. I've said all I need to say and, unlike you, I mean it when I say I'm done with this thread

 

[lhancock90]

Well, from reading personal accounts in this discussion, it doesn't seem to have taken very long to correct behaviour. I highly doubt that this type of action lasts any length of time to cause damage and elicit the label "abuse".

Dragonfly, the link you posted isn't representative at all. I very much doubt that most parents leave soap sitting in the child's mouth for 10 minutes.

I find it hard to take what you say as gospel because different authorities all over the country seem to have vastly differing ideas on what constitutes child endangerment (certain political party membership, for example). I also don't think you're in a position to say what "most" parents do with their children when they force them to ingest soap as you don't seem to have much experience of it.

I'm surprised that you're not referring to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which expressly states feeding children soap is an abuse of those rights.

You are right, I have no experience of it, but neither do you. The difference is that I'm not dismissive of the experiences of others in the quest to box them up as victims of abuse.

You keep referring to the UN convention which isn't even recognised in the US and the whole organisation is largely irrelevant in the world.

This is a bold statement to make. The UN is far bigger than you seem to believe.

 

[Lina]

You are right, I have no experience of it, but neither do you. The difference is that I'm not dismissive of the experiences of others in the quest to box them up as victims of abuse.

You keep referring to the UN convention which isn't even recognised in the US and the whole organisation is largely irrelevant in the world.

You don't know about my experiences of it. Just because I'm not on here pouring my heart out doesn't mean I have "no experience" of it.

I've never called anyone a victim of abuse, but I have called the practice abusive.

The United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child binds its signatory countries by international law, so it is not "largely irrelevant in the world". What a ridiculous statement to make. Only two countries in the world have not ratified it: the USA and Somalia. That really says it all.

You didn't need to, you call something abuse it is a given that those on the receiving end are victims of abuse, don't be so obtuse.

Also, you would be surprised at the number of signatories who have yet to even set up commissions to oversee things, ie India. The work doesn't stop with a signature on the dotted line. So yes, it is an organisation with no teeth who seeks to undermine parental autonomy.