Protection or Privacy infringement? Look to the 9th!
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
- The ninth amendment to the U.S. Constitution
In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court made a sweeping decision that forever changed the way that the government acted in accordance to the American family. Justice William Douglas introduced a new word into the Court’s lexicon: privacy. According to the majority opinion, the defense of privacy was a penumbra, or shadow, of the protections of the Bill of Right. The Court did so by invalidating a Connecticut law that banned the usage of contraceptives, emphasizing how the Court had a responsibility to protect marital and family relationships from government interference without strong justification.
Sally Lieber, a California lawmaker, has proposed a law that would make spanking a child under the age of three years old a crime, punishable by a fine and/or one year in prison. Lieber, who represents the district encompassing San Francisco, believes that corporal punishment victimizes helpless children and contributes to society’s addiction to crime.
Most Californians are skeptical (the proposal polls very poorly in the Golden State). The one thing that people dislike more than Uncle Sam getting involved in their personal lives is when he tells them how to raise their children. In addition, the law would be a nightmare to enforce.
A classic battle is set: Griswold’s legacy of protection of privacy vs. the state’s power to protect the defenseless. Who gets to decide how to punish the children of America? Is the slope a little too slippery for comfort? What’s next, a national bedtime for children under the age of ten?
The debate over the proper role of government in the lives of the citizenry rages on. Patriot of ’76 would love to know where you stand.
posted by CitizenPatriot at 7:50:00 PM
18 Comments:
Who is the person who made spanking a socially exceptable practice? Because it is. I don't understand why hitting a child's butt is not child abuse but hitting a child's face or pushing a child is considered child abuse. If beating your child is illegal, spanking should be illegal. Although not a parent, I believe in a zero tolerance policy. When it comes to inflicting physical pain on my child, I see no gray area. Just black and white.
8:16 PM
First, Griswold v. CT, then Casey v. Planned Parenthood and Roe v. Wade ... Who would have thought that the Supreme Court's "Emanations and penumbras" would have stretched so far.
Keep in mind however that under the Constitution's 14th Amendment's Substantive Due Process clause, the Supreme Court has granted to the parents of minor children a Fundamental Right to control the upbringing of their children. This fundamental right is protected under the Court's so-called Strict Scrutiny and can only be abridged by a State if the State can show that it has passed a law to meet a "compelling state interest" and that the law the State has chosen to us is narrowly tailored and the least restrictive means by which the State can accomplish its goals.
Nonetheless, Mr. Elbaum poses another interesting question!!!
2:46 PM
Huck,
Mr. Elbaum mentioned "strict scrutiny" when he said "without a strong justification"---you still never mentioned how you feel about the proposed bill. From your other responsed, I bet you wouldn't mind them getting whacked in the face
6:16 PM
Now way should spanking be illegal. First off, im gonna go off on a quick ap psychology tangent. the way humans learn is based off a system of rewards and punishments. Positive stimulation and the like are what reinforce acceptable behavior in society, and positive punishment(where something negative is given)is a reinforcer which helps to engrain habits of behavior. Mr. Elbaum has noted several times that young minds are like a sponge; it is imperative to understand that although it may seem wrong, what other ways can be used to train a human who is that young. It seems that a stinging physical pain in the ass(not to be confused with tortuous infant beatings, may be the best alternative next to starving and an absence of physical contact and nurture.
On the other hand, considering that this Sally Lieber is from california, a state which has a presumably larger poverty and crime rate,Im gonna go out on a limb and agree partially with her initiative to get something done. My guess is that the numerous impoverished families, whose parents themselves may have been poor, have a poor moral structure and do not know how to handle such incidents as misbehavior because they have not learned it as kids.
either way, i stand by my first paragraph and will continue to assert that unless a better alternative is given to training a human in early stages, a brief spank seems to be in order. The privacy granted by the constitution regarding family privacy concerns contraceptives...SEX...the most sacred of all acts. we are allowed to have sex without bearing young, should we be punished?!?!?! No, b/c the privacy granted gives us that right to choose. So if this sacred institution is defended by our laws, shouldn't the simplistic idea that we can raise our young accordingly (in a private manner) be upheld as well, with in reason?
6:32 PM
Michaelowski,
2 year olds don't understand cause and effect like 5 and 6 year olds do. THat's why the bill is for 3 and under.Elbaum's right- the consistution visa e vi Griswold provides privacy for consensual sex between adults---that doens't extend to inflicting pain on a defenseless kid
6:38 PM
toddie, who says they dont understand? that sounds pretty presumptuous. Brutal beatings should def be dealt with through the courts. But, here with the psychology againg, John B. Watson experimented with infant learning. A test on a 9 month old baby, dubbed little albert, a white rat was presented and the baby showed no reaction. Afterwards, the white rat was presented but watson made banging noises and scared the baby. later, other white objects were presented and the baby was scared due to the negative stimulus of the harsh sounds with white objects. Babies can learn, and there are other examples as well.
As for my inclusion of the sex talk and the rights given by the constitution regarding that issue are such...If the constitutin solidifies privacy in an act so sacred as sex, what gives it the right to intervene in the product of sex and, furthermore, family life? If an incidence of beating is found, the by all means put the one responsible on trial, but conventional spanking should not be made illegal.
ps. my name is spelled michalowski
6:48 PM
quickly, how does the california government expect to uphold such a law? do they propose to have montly baby butt checkings at local clinics and schools? What will prevent people from doing a quick spank in the privacy of their own home? Will a warrant be needed specifically for a baby's butt if its parents are suspected of "abuse"?
6:57 PM
Sorry for the spelling- no disrespect intended...
Regarding enforcement- I think that the purpose of the law isn't to actually apprehend parents. It's so when parents spank their children, they realize that they can be held criminally liable for their abuse. It gets them to think twice before inflicting meaningless pain.
What do you say about the argument that spanking turns kids violent?
7:25 PM
Government's 2 jobs:
1) Keep us safe
2) Get the hell out of the way
7:34 PM
I can understand that there is speculation about spanking leading to violence in a kid as he/she ages. But could other factors, namely parental violence, a poor neighborhood, and so forth, be a more prominent role. What and how many specific case studies have been performed? As a follow up, i can say that i have been spanked as a kid...if we polled elbaum's classes, even our school, im willing to guess taht more than a few have had that experience as a child. Thus, more factors than spanking should be considered in that particular hypothesis.
If the law is meant to have parents double think about spanking, doesn't that apply back to the privacy-sex issue in the houselholds. If contraceptives were indeed still illegal, it would make couples think twice about having sex. But we can see that notion was overruled because of the issue of family/household privacy. And i think the public interest is that child rearing should be up to parents. It is a private matter, we are not a utopia, giving up our kids to the community. Spanking, and other punishment, isnt meaningless if used appropriately to train and condition a kid to behave. If parents dont want to spank, then dont. Still, what are alternate forms of punishment??????? I can't think of any off the top of my head. I think that we are reachin an extreme by having anti-spanking laws. Are laws regarding child abuse not specific enough to determine which cases are and are not condidered abuse?
7:43 PM
Who is to say that the government, in all of its wisdowm and knowledge, is any more informed to direct the discipline of our nation's children as compared to the parents of these children...The chief of our government, Mr. Bush, has himself a daughter of his own who has been consistently involved in alleged under-aged drinking and other illicit activities.
9:21 PM
Speaking as a child punished and fed by the same hand as a child; I have to say that the reprecussions of corporal punishment are not as severe as the media and private interest groups would lead you to believe. For years the predominant form of punishment in the United States and most of the world has been spanking or some other form of corporal punishment. Winston Churchil's childhood is riddled with tails of him being beaten by a rod: "Spare the rod spoil the child" (Winston Churchil). Punishments in general have proven very effective in teaching vital survival skills: crossing streets, not touching hot items, etc. It wasnt until relatively recently that corporal punishment was considered a bad thing. There are cases where this form of punishment has been used excessively. These cases; however, are not nearly prominent enough to warrant an overall ban on spanking. As for the question of age; parents with children 3 years or younger definately have the right to discipline there children. They must be able to punish there children. Corporal punishment unquestionably leaves a psychological impression on the child. This impression; however, is not as significant as one would suspect and is usually not one of the violence, but rather that the parents were angry when the child did w/e. The result is that the child, who can by now recognize its parents and depends on them, will not repeat the act because of the punishment. Spanking is a way to teach a child, especially a younger one, a vital life lesson in a timely manner.
12:35 AM
Amen
7:16 AM
I was spanked numerous times as a child.
It was not pleasant.
I agree with Aimee. Inflicting pain on children should be classified under the realm of "black and white" issues. I don't think that smacking a child is the best way to reiterate good behavior.
It supports quite the opposite, in fact.
But what's with the "three and under" policy?
Hmm.
4:07 PM
spanking is a way to let your child know not to do something. If they talk back to their mother or father, my guess is a spanking will teach them a valuable lesson about respect. Our society seems to be changing. Children are more spoiled than ever and dont feel the need to respect their parents. Spanking isnt completely necessary but it is a great disciplinary method. Besides, is it really the court's decision on how people can raise their children. Parents are allowed to control the upbringing of their children, how is spanking not covered in this clause?
1:53 PM
In regards to the issue of spanking, I really didn't like them, but they did teach me how to behave correctly.
Spanking should not be considered child abuse because it has been a slightly painful, but effective way to help children at an early age. This practice has been going on for a long time, and it works.
Unlike other forms of punishment, such as pepper on the tongue, soap in the mouth, etc., this form of behavioral correction leaves the biggest impact on a child's mind, helping them to behave better than after the other forms of correction.
8:14 PM
My opinion on this can be more or less summed up by a quote by Thomas Jefferson: "He who trades liberty for security deserves neither and will lose both.”
3:06 PM
I completely agree with 'jls' that children are more spoiled than ever (i worked at a girl's dance camp last summer). Yet at the same time, there are some parents that just give their kids "the look" and they instantly behave. Are these the parents that spank, or have they found another way to keep their kids in line?
Its hard to say until we have kids and find out for ourselves what disciplining style works best. I don't think violence is the right way to raise children, but since there is no consensus on the "best" way to raise children, there is no way this bill can pass.
11:24 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home