Education campaigner: Action is needed to protect teachers after fatal stabbing

Parents Aloud founder Margaret Morrissey

Police outside Corpus Christi Catholic College in Leeds

Fatally wounded teacher Anne Maguire

First published in News Dorset Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Dorchester reporter

AN EDUCATION campaigner from Poundbury has warned that the tragedy of a teacher killed at school may not be the last of its kind unless tough new measures are taken.

The nation has been rocked by the shocking fatal stabbing of 61-year-old teacher Anne Maguire at Corpus Christi Catholic College in Leeds.

A 15-year-old boy has been arrested in connection with the incident.

Margaret Morrissey, founder of Parents Outloud, worked with widow Frances Lawrence after her husband Phillip had been stabbed to death outside the London school where he was headteacher in 1995 to look at what could be done in response to the tragedy.

Mrs Morrissey, who was working in London at the time, said that some steps had been taken in the intervening period to improve security in schools but not enough had been done.

She said schools were reluctant to admit the extent of the problems they faced because they were ‘afraid of the repercussions’ from bodies such as the LEA (Local Education Authority), Ofsted and the government.

Mrs Morrissey said that measures such as security entrances to schools had to be seriously considered to prevent further tragedies.

She said: “I’m not talking about every school but large secondary schools.

“Sadly society has changed and we can’t pretend it hasn’t.

“I think we have got to accept life isn’t as it was even 20 years ago when Philip Lawrence died.”

Mrs Morrissey said the tough measures may sound extreme but she wanted people to think how they would feel if their relatives had been involved in the latest tragedy.

She said: “I think we have got to say to the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and everybody else concerned that we have got to be realistic and we have got to do some serious checks.

“If we aren’t dramatic about it and don’t make a fuss it will just go on and unfortunately in a few years, it may not be very many, it will happen again.”

Mrs Morrissey said there would obviously be a significant cost to putting in the security measures but this could be diverted from money the government was spending elsewhere.

She also urged those at the top to ask the question: ‘What price is a life?’

Comments (48)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:53am Wed 30 Apr 14

marabout says...

Goodness me Mozzer - You really have shamed yourself with this one.

Unbelievable comments.... totally unbelievable.
Goodness me Mozzer - You really have shamed yourself with this one. Unbelievable comments.... totally unbelievable. marabout
  • Score: 19

10:08am Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause" Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 9

10:48am Wed 30 Apr 14

woodsedge says...

Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
Oh SigTurd, if only we could all be as well educated, knowledgable and wise as you so obviously are. And not to forget always right!
[quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]Oh SigTurd, if only we could all be as well educated, knowledgable and wise as you so obviously are. And not to forget always right! woodsedge
  • Score: -18

11:18am Wed 30 Apr 14

jjlad2 says...

woodsedge, you do no justice on your ever icreasing stalking of SH, no sooner has he made a comment than you are posting trivial sarchastic comments. you need to get a life mate.
woodsedge, you do no justice on your ever icreasing stalking of SH, no sooner has he made a comment than you are posting trivial sarchastic comments. you need to get a life mate. jjlad2
  • Score: 23

1:51pm Wed 30 Apr 14

mr commonsense says...

What a sad bunch most of you are.
We all live in a fairly lawless society these days. A teacher is stabbed to death by a child, in front of other children and you pour your puerile rubbish onto a lady who has done more to help teachers than all of us put together.
Shame on and I have never met the lady.
What a sad bunch most of you are. We all live in a fairly lawless society these days. A teacher is stabbed to death by a child, in front of other children and you pour your puerile rubbish onto a lady who has done more to help teachers than all of us put together. Shame on and I have never met the lady. mr commonsense
  • Score: -18

2:16pm Wed 30 Apr 14

fancyabrew says...

Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline? fancyabrew
  • Score: 7

4:34pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Bollard says...

weymuffdiver wrote:
this country has gone to sh%t!
Eh? Stuff like this happens regularly in the USA, and because they have such easy access to guns they usually take the whole class with them.
This awful incident shouldn't be ignored but it's hadly like we have an epidemic.
[quote][p][bold]weymuffdiver[/bold] wrote: this country has gone to sh%t![/p][/quote]Eh? Stuff like this happens regularly in the USA, and because they have such easy access to guns they usually take the whole class with them. This awful incident shouldn't be ignored but it's hadly like we have an epidemic. Bollard
  • Score: 9

5:28pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

jjlad2 wrote:
woodsedge, you do no justice on your ever icreasing stalking of SH, no sooner has he made a comment than you are posting trivial sarchastic comments. you need to get a life mate.
Let the self - proclaimed Savior of women and spokesperson for feminism carry on.. he is an excellent representative of them and he does so much of my work for me ;-)
[quote][p][bold]jjlad2[/bold] wrote: woodsedge, you do no justice on your ever icreasing stalking of SH, no sooner has he made a comment than you are posting trivial sarchastic comments. you need to get a life mate.[/p][/quote]Let the self - proclaimed Savior of women and spokesperson for feminism carry on.. he is an excellent representative of them and he does so much of my work for me ;-) Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 10

5:46pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Tonyglyn says...

Oh what a surprise - lots of comments removed!
Oh what a surprise - lots of comments removed! Tonyglyn
  • Score: 13

5:52pm Wed 30 Apr 14

7drawers says...

An awlful thing has happened.. BUT this sort of thing does not happen on a weekly monthly or even yearly basis. A young woman was killed in a department store a few years back but we dont have security scanners in them......
An awlful thing has happened.. BUT this sort of thing does not happen on a weekly monthly or even yearly basis. A young woman was killed in a department store a few years back but we dont have security scanners in them...... 7drawers
  • Score: 14

7:12pm Wed 30 Apr 14

woodsedge says...

fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
[quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with? woodsedge
  • Score: 17

7:28pm Wed 30 Apr 14

ksmain says...

Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
[quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments. ksmain
  • Score: -10

8:05pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 12

8:11pm Wed 30 Apr 14

woodsedge says...

ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
You are wasting your breath ksmain and giving this 'man' the attention he so obviously craves. People are quick to blame teachers for children that have not been parented correctly and no nothing different than inappropriate behaviour. Margaret Morrissey obviously cares passionately about children and is equally concerned about the well being of teachers. All that Sigturd cares about is a male misogynist agenda and is incapable of debating without insulting language. He has a track record of defending criminals purely because they are male and insulting females, regardless of the issue, simply because they are not male.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]You are wasting your breath ksmain and giving this 'man' the attention he so obviously craves. People are quick to blame teachers for children that have not been parented correctly and no nothing different than inappropriate behaviour. Margaret Morrissey obviously cares passionately about children and is equally concerned about the well being of teachers. All that Sigturd cares about is a male misogynist agenda and is incapable of debating without insulting language. He has a track record of defending criminals purely because they are male and insulting females, regardless of the issue, simply because they are not male. woodsedge
  • Score: -17

8:14pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

woodsedge wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
You are wasting your breath ksmain and giving this 'man' the attention he so obviously craves. People are quick to blame teachers for children that have not been parented correctly and no nothing different than inappropriate behaviour. Margaret Morrissey obviously cares passionately about children and is equally concerned about the well being of teachers. All that Sigturd cares about is a male misogynist agenda and is incapable of debating without insulting language. He has a track record of defending criminals purely because they are male and insulting females, regardless of the issue, simply because they are not male.
Looks like my stalker is becoming rather unhinged....
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]You are wasting your breath ksmain and giving this 'man' the attention he so obviously craves. People are quick to blame teachers for children that have not been parented correctly and no nothing different than inappropriate behaviour. Margaret Morrissey obviously cares passionately about children and is equally concerned about the well being of teachers. All that Sigturd cares about is a male misogynist agenda and is incapable of debating without insulting language. He has a track record of defending criminals purely because they are male and insulting females, regardless of the issue, simply because they are not male.[/p][/quote]Looks like my stalker is becoming rather unhinged.... Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 13

8:16pm Wed 30 Apr 14

ksmain says...

Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.
You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.
[quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.[/p][/quote]You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing. ksmain
  • Score: -7

8:17pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

" and is incapable of debating without insulting language" - woodsedge.

Well I don't think anyone could call that anything less then complete hypocrisy, you have been offered debate numerous times, even the leader of a political party come on here and you just ran away..all you got is your psychosis, paranoia false accusations and vitriol., you never debate a thing and now other readers have started telling you to get a life and stop stalking people on every single comment, you start throwing his toys out the pram.
" and is incapable of debating without insulting language" - woodsedge. Well I don't think anyone could call that anything less then complete hypocrisy, you have been offered debate numerous times, even the leader of a political party come on here and you just ran away..all you got is your psychosis, paranoia false accusations and vitriol., you never debate a thing and now other readers have started telling you to get a life and stop stalking people on every single comment, you start throwing his toys out the pram. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 12

8:21pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.
You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.
One does not need any expertise to witness people standing around yakking aimlessly and not doing their job. It is what it is
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.[/p][/quote]You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.[/p][/quote]One does not need any expertise to witness people standing around yakking aimlessly and not doing their job. It is what it is Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 12

8:29pm Wed 30 Apr 14

ksmain says...

Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.
You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.
One does not need any expertise to witness people standing around yakking aimlessly and not doing their job. It is what it is
How do you know they weren't on their break? Or returning to it? Do you have their timesheets as coroborative evidence? Why were you eavesdropping their conversation? You have just spectacularly underlined my point - you can interpret anything you witness to suit your viewpoint. But without evidence it is useless.
[quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.[/p][/quote]You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.[/p][/quote]One does not need any expertise to witness people standing around yakking aimlessly and not doing their job. It is what it is[/p][/quote]How do you know they weren't on their break? Or returning to it? Do you have their timesheets as coroborative evidence? Why were you eavesdropping their conversation? You have just spectacularly underlined my point - you can interpret anything you witness to suit your viewpoint. But without evidence it is useless. ksmain
  • Score: -8

8:39pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.
You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.
One does not need any expertise to witness people standing around yakking aimlessly and not doing their job. It is what it is
How do you know they weren't on their break? Or returning to it? Do you have their timesheets as coroborative evidence? Why were you eavesdropping their conversation? You have just spectacularly underlined my point - you can interpret anything you witness to suit your viewpoint. But without evidence it is useless.
You somehow are under the illusion I am the only person who has commented on that and said the same thing on here, I am not.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]Yes because me saying that is somehow saying i don't mind people being stabbed? How the hell do you come to that conclusion? . My comments on the hospital were what I have witnessed myself, sorry you don;t like the truth.[/p][/quote]You can interpret anything you witness any way you want - but to get to the truth you have to KNOW how it works. Otherwise you are an expert on nothing.[/p][/quote]One does not need any expertise to witness people standing around yakking aimlessly and not doing their job. It is what it is[/p][/quote]How do you know they weren't on their break? Or returning to it? Do you have their timesheets as coroborative evidence? Why were you eavesdropping their conversation? You have just spectacularly underlined my point - you can interpret anything you witness to suit your viewpoint. But without evidence it is useless.[/p][/quote]You somehow are under the illusion I am the only person who has commented on that and said the same thing on here, I am not. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 8

9:38pm Wed 30 Apr 14

westbaywonder says...

Morrissey has her own agenda and it has nothing to do with helping people.

Get real, What is she going to do ? Offer to bake a cake.LOL

A lot of sheep style citizens on here lately that need to wake up and have the guts to tell the truth as Sigurd does.
Sigurd is Top man on here,that is widely known and long may it continue!
Morrissey has her own agenda and it has nothing to do with helping people. Get real, What is she going to do ? Offer to bake a cake.LOL A lot of sheep style citizens on here lately that need to wake up and have the guts to tell the truth as Sigurd does. Sigurd is Top man on here,that is widely known and long may it continue! westbaywonder
  • Score: 6

9:50pm Wed 30 Apr 14

woodsedge says...

westbaywonder wrote:
Morrissey has her own agenda and it has nothing to do with helping people.

Get real, What is she going to do ? Offer to bake a cake.LOL

A lot of sheep style citizens on here lately that need to wake up and have the guts to tell the truth as Sigurd does.
Sigurd is Top man on here,that is widely known and long may it continue!
I agree Sigurd is simply the best, a top man and salt of the earth. He really tells it as it is and what about those You Tube clips, wowwwwww!! I really, really feel privileged to be constantly imparted with his vast knowledge.
[quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Morrissey has her own agenda and it has nothing to do with helping people. Get real, What is she going to do ? Offer to bake a cake.LOL A lot of sheep style citizens on here lately that need to wake up and have the guts to tell the truth as Sigurd does. Sigurd is Top man on here,that is widely known and long may it continue![/p][/quote]I agree Sigurd is simply the best, a top man and salt of the earth. He really tells it as it is and what about those You Tube clips, wowwwwww!! I really, really feel privileged to be constantly imparted with his vast knowledge. woodsedge
  • Score: -12

10:16pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Tinker2 says...

Well done everyone, worst case of diatribe yet.
Howzabout making some contructive comments on topic?
Well done everyone, worst case of diatribe yet. Howzabout making some contructive comments on topic? Tinker2
  • Score: -2

1:06am Thu 1 May 14

westbaywonder says...

Tinker2 wrote:
Well done everyone, worst case of diatribe yet.
Howzabout making some contructive comments on topic?
Go on then,you make what you consider to be a constructive comment.
[quote][p][bold]Tinker2[/bold] wrote: Well done everyone, worst case of diatribe yet. Howzabout making some contructive comments on topic?[/p][/quote]Go on then,you make what you consider to be a constructive comment. westbaywonder
  • Score: 5

9:00am Thu 1 May 14

JamesYoung says...

woodsedge wrote:
fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-).
Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process).
By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance.
I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?[/p][/quote]You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-). Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process). By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance. I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip. JamesYoung
  • Score: 6

10:36am Thu 1 May 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

JamesYoung wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-).
Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process).
By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance.
I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.
No argument from me on that James, I agree with you. We all know what side of the Political divide created that nonsense, the same one that wants the State to replace parents.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?[/p][/quote]You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-). Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process). By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance. I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.[/p][/quote]No argument from me on that James, I agree with you. We all know what side of the Political divide created that nonsense, the same one that wants the State to replace parents. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 4

11:37am Thu 1 May 14

caz maz says...

There is no way to protect anyone from the mentally disturbed people until they committed there first act.................
.
There is no way to protect anyone from the mentally disturbed people until they committed there first act................. . caz maz
  • Score: -2

12:34pm Thu 1 May 14

JamesYoung says...

caz maz wrote:
There is no way to protect anyone from the mentally disturbed people until they committed there first act.................

.
That is also true, but there is an assumption in your comment. Was this lad truly mentally disturbed, or was he just a kid who had never been taught how to control his anger? We don't know, but if it was the former, then your comment is right on the money.
[quote][p][bold]caz maz[/bold] wrote: There is no way to protect anyone from the mentally disturbed people until they committed there first act................. .[/p][/quote]That is also true, but there is an assumption in your comment. Was this lad truly mentally disturbed, or was he just a kid who had never been taught how to control his anger? We don't know, but if it was the former, then your comment is right on the money. JamesYoung
  • Score: 1

1:38pm Thu 1 May 14

Bob Goulding says...

Without in any way wishing to divert attention away from this dreadful event, and the ongoing security issues in some schools, I wonder what Margaret Morrissey’s view is regarding the removal of the Portland Coastguard SAR helicopter in 2017.

Mrs Morrissey said that measures such as security entrances to schools had to be seriously considered to prevent further tragedies. She also said there would obviously be a significant cost to putting in the security measures but this could be diverted from money the government was spending elsewhere.

Why should this principal not be applied to retaining the Portland SAR helicopter as it is certain that lives will be lost without it. The cost of retention would be minimal in comparison with the cost of upgrading security in schools but the risk of further fatalities in schools is much lower.
Without in any way wishing to divert attention away from this dreadful event, and the ongoing security issues in some schools, I wonder what Margaret Morrissey’s view is regarding the removal of the Portland Coastguard SAR helicopter in 2017. Mrs Morrissey said that measures such as security entrances to schools had to be seriously considered to prevent further tragedies. She also said there would obviously be a significant cost to putting in the security measures but this could be diverted from money the government was spending elsewhere. Why should this principal not be applied to retaining the Portland SAR helicopter as it is certain that lives will be lost without it. The cost of retention would be minimal in comparison with the cost of upgrading security in schools but the risk of further fatalities in schools is much lower. Bob Goulding
  • Score: 5

2:23pm Thu 1 May 14

cj07589 says...

Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
You are wasting your breath ksmain and giving this 'man' the attention he so obviously craves. People are quick to blame teachers for children that have not been parented correctly and no nothing different than inappropriate behaviour. Margaret Morrissey obviously cares passionately about children and is equally concerned about the well being of teachers. All that Sigturd cares about is a male misogynist agenda and is incapable of debating without insulting language. He has a track record of defending criminals purely because they are male and insulting females, regardless of the issue, simply because they are not male.
Looks like my stalker is becoming rather unhinged....
Phew, I'm glad I am not the only blogger being stalked by Woodsedge esq. where reason and common sense have no place.
[quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]You are wasting your breath ksmain and giving this 'man' the attention he so obviously craves. People are quick to blame teachers for children that have not been parented correctly and no nothing different than inappropriate behaviour. Margaret Morrissey obviously cares passionately about children and is equally concerned about the well being of teachers. All that Sigturd cares about is a male misogynist agenda and is incapable of debating without insulting language. He has a track record of defending criminals purely because they are male and insulting females, regardless of the issue, simply because they are not male.[/p][/quote]Looks like my stalker is becoming rather unhinged....[/p][/quote]Phew, I'm glad I am not the only blogger being stalked by Woodsedge esq. where reason and common sense have no place. cj07589
  • Score: 4

2:35pm Thu 1 May 14

cj07589 says...

ksmain wrote:
Sigurd Hoeberth wrote:
The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"
IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet!

So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.
A bit of a silly comment! By using the OP logic should we ban cars too they kill thousands of innocent people per year. No matter what changes and legislation is brought in you are never going to stop all of the unhinged lunatics out there. I agree that discipline in state schools is partly responsible but the the liberal bleeding hearts won't have it any other way so be it on their heads. Also parents need to take responsibility for the way they raise their offspring. Sadly the wrong type of people are given fiscal incentives to breed so responsible parenting and upbringing is not a pre-requisite of being a parent.
I trust the OP has considered the huge fiscal cost for rolling out security entrances X-rays and the staffing costs associated with the hair brain notation. So again more money will be diverted away from core education hardly a sensible or practical legacy.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sigurd Hoeberth[/bold] wrote: The coffee shop scribblers, any excuse for a "cause"[/p][/quote]IMO you do make some purile (and laughable comments - they ones recently about the local hospital were hilariously incorrect) on this site but this has to be the best yet! So would you have no objection to your wife/life partner being stabbed to death by a 15 year old in front of a class of other pupils for apparently no reason? To my mind this is symptomatic of the failure of discipline and the justice system in this country. Not to be laughed at or for purile comments.[/p][/quote]A bit of a silly comment! By using the OP logic should we ban cars too they kill thousands of innocent people per year. No matter what changes and legislation is brought in you are never going to stop all of the unhinged lunatics out there. I agree that discipline in state schools is partly responsible but the the liberal bleeding hearts won't have it any other way so be it on their heads. Also parents need to take responsibility for the way they raise their offspring. Sadly the wrong type of people are given fiscal incentives to breed so responsible parenting and upbringing is not a pre-requisite of being a parent. I trust the OP has considered the huge fiscal cost for rolling out security entrances X-rays and the staffing costs associated with the hair brain notation. So again more money will be diverted away from core education hardly a sensible or practical legacy. cj07589
  • Score: 4

2:36pm Thu 1 May 14

woodsedge says...

JamesYoung wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-).
Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process).
By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance.
I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.
Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?[/p][/quote]You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-). Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process). By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance. I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.[/p][/quote]Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right. woodsedge
  • Score: -3

3:32pm Thu 1 May 14

Bob Goulding says...

woodsedge wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-).
Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process).
By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance.
I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.
Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.
Forgive me woodsedge but I think you are being a little smug and idealistic. I too have raised two children successfully but, on a very few occasions, I did feel it necessary, for their own benefit ultimately, to impose my will physically. I did not 'beat them up' nor did I leave a mark, but I did 'grab their attention' at a time when it was necessary to demonstrate who was in charge. Interestingly, neither of them (both now in their late 30's/early 40's and parents themselves) have any negative memories of the incidents and actually support the concept of using 'reasonable force' when faced with unacceptable behavior and/or blatant disrespect from their children. Actually their kids are basically very good but unfortunately they are influenced by some of their peers at school who are less well controlled.

James, I am very much in agreement with you on this and I am appalled to hear that you were charged with battery for slapping your children. Even now (unless the law has changed very recently) parents are allowed to smack children as long as it does not leave a mark. I too would like to see some movement towards a return to controlled corporal punishment using similar guidelines and with strict reporting requirements.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?[/p][/quote]You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-). Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process). By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance. I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.[/p][/quote]Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.[/p][/quote]Forgive me woodsedge but I think you are being a little smug and idealistic. I too have raised two children successfully but, on a very few occasions, I did feel it necessary, for their own benefit ultimately, to impose my will physically. I did not 'beat them up' nor did I leave a mark, but I did 'grab their attention' at a time when it was necessary to demonstrate who was in charge. Interestingly, neither of them (both now in their late 30's/early 40's and parents themselves) have any negative memories of the incidents and actually support the concept of using 'reasonable force' when faced with unacceptable behavior and/or blatant disrespect from their children. Actually their kids are basically very good but unfortunately they are influenced by some of their peers at school who are less well controlled. James, I am very much in agreement with you on this and I am appalled to hear that you were charged with battery for slapping your children. Even now (unless the law has changed very recently) parents are allowed to smack children as long as it does not leave a mark. I too would like to see some movement towards a return to controlled corporal punishment using similar guidelines and with strict reporting requirements. Bob Goulding
  • Score: 5

3:50pm Thu 1 May 14

Bert Fry says...

Interesting comments but if you do physically chastise your children there must come an age where it is no longer acceptable. Whist you may see nothing wrong in smacking a 9 year old would it be the same if the child way, say, 12 or 14 or 16.
Also, James/Bob, for clarity, I take it your chastisement was with your hand rather than a belt or stick, or should that not matter. Not necessarily disagreeing with either but I am interested.
Interesting comments but if you do physically chastise your children there must come an age where it is no longer acceptable. Whist you may see nothing wrong in smacking a 9 year old would it be the same if the child way, say, 12 or 14 or 16. Also, James/Bob, for clarity, I take it your chastisement was with your hand rather than a belt or stick, or should that not matter. Not necessarily disagreeing with either but I am interested. Bert Fry
  • Score: -1

5:26pm Thu 1 May 14

Bob Goulding says...

Bert Fry wrote:
Interesting comments but if you do physically chastise your children there must come an age where it is no longer acceptable. Whist you may see nothing wrong in smacking a 9 year old would it be the same if the child way, say, 12 or 14 or 16.
Also, James/Bob, for clarity, I take it your chastisement was with your hand rather than a belt or stick, or should that not matter. Not necessarily disagreeing with either but I am interested.
Hi Bert, good point/question. I can assure you that no weapon was involved. It is also interesting that, having set the boundaries and gained control at an early age (not quite sure exactly when but certainly before school age) it was no longer necessary to resort to physical chastisement. From birth, children make demands and express them overtly without compromise. They have no concept of good or bad and have no regard or understanding of the needs or feelings of others (specifically their parents in the early days and months). They simply expect their needs to be paramount and fulfilled without question. Over time, it is the role of parents to condition the behaviour of their children to conform to what is generally accepted as socially acceptable using whatever means is necessary short of any form of cruelty or brutality, physical or mental. If not clearly directed by their parents children are more vulnerable to negative influences from their peers and 'the World in general'.
[quote][p][bold]Bert Fry[/bold] wrote: Interesting comments but if you do physically chastise your children there must come an age where it is no longer acceptable. Whist you may see nothing wrong in smacking a 9 year old would it be the same if the child way, say, 12 or 14 or 16. Also, James/Bob, for clarity, I take it your chastisement was with your hand rather than a belt or stick, or should that not matter. Not necessarily disagreeing with either but I am interested.[/p][/quote]Hi Bert, good point/question. I can assure you that no weapon was involved. It is also interesting that, having set the boundaries and gained control at an early age (not quite sure exactly when but certainly before school age) it was no longer necessary to resort to physical chastisement. From birth, children make demands and express them overtly without compromise. They have no concept of good or bad and have no regard or understanding of the needs or feelings of others (specifically their parents in the early days and months). They simply expect their needs to be paramount and fulfilled without question. Over time, it is the role of parents to condition the behaviour of their children to conform to what is generally accepted as socially acceptable using whatever means is necessary short of any form of cruelty or brutality, physical or mental. If not clearly directed by their parents children are more vulnerable to negative influences from their peers and 'the World in general'. Bob Goulding
  • Score: 2

6:05pm Thu 1 May 14

woodsedge says...

Bob Goulding wrote:
Bert Fry wrote:
Interesting comments but if you do physically chastise your children there must come an age where it is no longer acceptable. Whist you may see nothing wrong in smacking a 9 year old would it be the same if the child way, say, 12 or 14 or 16.
Also, James/Bob, for clarity, I take it your chastisement was with your hand rather than a belt or stick, or should that not matter. Not necessarily disagreeing with either but I am interested.
Hi Bert, good point/question. I can assure you that no weapon was involved. It is also interesting that, having set the boundaries and gained control at an early age (not quite sure exactly when but certainly before school age) it was no longer necessary to resort to physical chastisement. From birth, children make demands and express them overtly without compromise. They have no concept of good or bad and have no regard or understanding of the needs or feelings of others (specifically their parents in the early days and months). They simply expect their needs to be paramount and fulfilled without question. Over time, it is the role of parents to condition the behaviour of their children to conform to what is generally accepted as socially acceptable using whatever means is necessary short of any form of cruelty or brutality, physical or mental. If not clearly directed by their parents children are more vulnerable to negative influences from their peers and 'the World in general'.
Bob, I agree with every word of your post and I apologise if my previous post came across as smug as this was not my intention. Although I agree with your post I do not agree with the method you used. I have also managed to raise children who know boundaries, have empathy with others and are socially accepted without physically chastising them. That is not me being smug simply a statement of fact. I was raised by a father who liked to physically correct behaviour and that stayed with me until I had children of my own.
[quote][p][bold]Bob Goulding[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bert Fry[/bold] wrote: Interesting comments but if you do physically chastise your children there must come an age where it is no longer acceptable. Whist you may see nothing wrong in smacking a 9 year old would it be the same if the child way, say, 12 or 14 or 16. Also, James/Bob, for clarity, I take it your chastisement was with your hand rather than a belt or stick, or should that not matter. Not necessarily disagreeing with either but I am interested.[/p][/quote]Hi Bert, good point/question. I can assure you that no weapon was involved. It is also interesting that, having set the boundaries and gained control at an early age (not quite sure exactly when but certainly before school age) it was no longer necessary to resort to physical chastisement. From birth, children make demands and express them overtly without compromise. They have no concept of good or bad and have no regard or understanding of the needs or feelings of others (specifically their parents in the early days and months). They simply expect their needs to be paramount and fulfilled without question. Over time, it is the role of parents to condition the behaviour of their children to conform to what is generally accepted as socially acceptable using whatever means is necessary short of any form of cruelty or brutality, physical or mental. If not clearly directed by their parents children are more vulnerable to negative influences from their peers and 'the World in general'.[/p][/quote]Bob, I agree with every word of your post and I apologise if my previous post came across as smug as this was not my intention. Although I agree with your post I do not agree with the method you used. I have also managed to raise children who know boundaries, have empathy with others and are socially accepted without physically chastising them. That is not me being smug simply a statement of fact. I was raised by a father who liked to physically correct behaviour and that stayed with me until I had children of my own. woodsedge
  • Score: -1

7:26pm Thu 1 May 14

ksmain says...

westbaywonder wrote:
Morrissey has her own agenda and it has nothing to do with helping people.

Get real, What is she going to do ? Offer to bake a cake.LOL

A lot of sheep style citizens on here lately that need to wake up and have the guts to tell the truth as Sigurd does.
Sigurd is Top man on here,that is widely known and long may it continue!
We would - if he knew any truth. The problem is it mostly guesswork, supposition and formed by his opinion.

I see you are a follower.
[quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Morrissey has her own agenda and it has nothing to do with helping people. Get real, What is she going to do ? Offer to bake a cake.LOL A lot of sheep style citizens on here lately that need to wake up and have the guts to tell the truth as Sigurd does. Sigurd is Top man on here,that is widely known and long may it continue![/p][/quote]We would - if he knew any truth. The problem is it mostly guesswork, supposition and formed by his opinion. I see you are a follower. ksmain
  • Score: -4

7:28pm Thu 1 May 14

JamesYoung says...

Bob Goulding wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-).
Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process).
By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance.
I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.
Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.
Forgive me woodsedge but I think you are being a little smug and idealistic. I too have raised two children successfully but, on a very few occasions, I did feel it necessary, for their own benefit ultimately, to impose my will physically. I did not 'beat them up' nor did I leave a mark, but I did 'grab their attention' at a time when it was necessary to demonstrate who was in charge. Interestingly, neither of them (both now in their late 30's/early 40's and parents themselves) have any negative memories of the incidents and actually support the concept of using 'reasonable force' when faced with unacceptable behavior and/or blatant disrespect from their children. Actually their kids are basically very good but unfortunately they are influenced by some of their peers at school who are less well controlled.

James, I am very much in agreement with you on this and I am appalled to hear that you were charged with battery for slapping your children. Even now (unless the law has changed very recently) parents are allowed to smack children as long as it does not leave a mark. I too would like to see some movement towards a return to controlled corporal punishment using similar guidelines and with strict reporting requirements.
This is the fundamental problem, Bob. The definition of battery (this isn't the legal definition) is harming with intent. The idea that leaving a mark implies that you intended to hurt a child, and not leaving one implies that you did not, is simple idiocy. In my case, i left a red finger mark while breaking up a fight in which one son was wielding a heavy object that could have put his brother in hospital. This happened minutes before school and i sent him to school anyway telling him that if anybody asked, to tell them the truth about what happened. He did. I was astounded sat the response. The social worker was quite literally rabid. She demanded that i take afternoons off work (at the time i worked in Exeter) and then didn't turn up - several times. Her answer - I'll come tomorrow, take tomorrow off too - if you don't, i will report you as uncooperative. She met the kids - without me present - and they told her that slapping was a rare event in our house. She didn't believe them. She spoke to my GP without my permission, and tried to infer that my wife's visits to get painkillers were a veiled attempt at seeking help. When i challenged her on some of the views she expressed, she wrote in her report that i was "aggressive but she didn't feel threatened". Aggression without feeling threatened?. That's just a malicious interpretation of "assertive". If you are familiar with the protocol, you'll know that they also talk to school teachers. My son's told her that he was doing well, but could do better. This is what the teacher told me. That went in the report as "failing to thrive" with the fact that my son was apparently scared of a police officer also inferred as being in some way problematic. The report also said that as a family unit we were not integrated into the community (at the time, we were all active members of a local church, I drove a minibus for two local charities and was a director of another). The worst of it: despite all these factual inaccuracies, she refused to modify her report. Thankfully her conclusion was the same as the police: no threat. She did advise me, however, to step down from one of the charity jobs that i did, because if a child ever made an allegation i'd be in the firing line. I stepped down from all three as the whole incident knocked me for six.
The problem that i have is that inspite of clear evidence that violence perpetuated by children is on the rise, we are governed by a minority who have a view that is simply not substantiated by evidence. They are criminalising fathers and destroying families because of a liberal dogma. It is unnecessary.
Woodsedge's view is of course valid - there are many families that think slapping is ok, and many that don't. I have no issue with that. What i have an issue with is the suggestion (made by the social worker, too) that slapping leads to more serious forms of abuse. There is absolutely no evidence for this.
There is, however, plenty of evidence of two other things. Firstly, social workers are missing the most serious cases because of their obsession with cases that aren't abuse in the first place. Secondly, those who abuse kids in the most horrendous ways are not in the slightest bit put off by rules about slapping.
[quote][p][bold]Bob Goulding[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?[/p][/quote]You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-). Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process). By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance. I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.[/p][/quote]Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.[/p][/quote]Forgive me woodsedge but I think you are being a little smug and idealistic. I too have raised two children successfully but, on a very few occasions, I did feel it necessary, for their own benefit ultimately, to impose my will physically. I did not 'beat them up' nor did I leave a mark, but I did 'grab their attention' at a time when it was necessary to demonstrate who was in charge. Interestingly, neither of them (both now in their late 30's/early 40's and parents themselves) have any negative memories of the incidents and actually support the concept of using 'reasonable force' when faced with unacceptable behavior and/or blatant disrespect from their children. Actually their kids are basically very good but unfortunately they are influenced by some of their peers at school who are less well controlled. James, I am very much in agreement with you on this and I am appalled to hear that you were charged with battery for slapping your children. Even now (unless the law has changed very recently) parents are allowed to smack children as long as it does not leave a mark. I too would like to see some movement towards a return to controlled corporal punishment using similar guidelines and with strict reporting requirements.[/p][/quote]This is the fundamental problem, Bob. The definition of battery (this isn't the legal definition) is harming with intent. The idea that leaving a mark implies that you intended to hurt a child, and not leaving one implies that you did not, is simple idiocy. In my case, i left a red finger mark while breaking up a fight in which one son was wielding a heavy object that could have put his brother in hospital. This happened minutes before school and i sent him to school anyway telling him that if anybody asked, to tell them the truth about what happened. He did. I was astounded sat the response. The social worker was quite literally rabid. She demanded that i take afternoons off work (at the time i worked in Exeter) and then didn't turn up - several times. Her answer - I'll come tomorrow, take tomorrow off too - if you don't, i will report you as uncooperative. She met the kids - without me present - and they told her that slapping was a rare event in our house. She didn't believe them. She spoke to my GP without my permission, and tried to infer that my wife's visits to get painkillers were a veiled attempt at seeking help. When i challenged her on some of the views she expressed, she wrote in her report that i was "aggressive but she didn't feel threatened". Aggression without feeling threatened?. That's just a malicious interpretation of "assertive". If you are familiar with the protocol, you'll know that they also talk to school teachers. My son's told her that he was doing well, but could do better. This is what the teacher told me. That went in the report as "failing to thrive" with the fact that my son was apparently scared of a police officer also inferred as being in some way problematic. The report also said that as a family unit we were not integrated into the community (at the time, we were all active members of a local church, I drove a minibus for two local charities and was a director of another). The worst of it: despite all these factual inaccuracies, she refused to modify her report. Thankfully her conclusion was the same as the police: no threat. She did advise me, however, to step down from one of the charity jobs that i did, because if a child ever made an allegation i'd be in the firing line. I stepped down from all three as the whole incident knocked me for six. The problem that i have is that inspite of clear evidence that violence perpetuated by children is on the rise, we are governed by a minority who have a view that is simply not substantiated by evidence. They are criminalising fathers and destroying families because of a liberal dogma. It is unnecessary. Woodsedge's view is of course valid - there are many families that think slapping is ok, and many that don't. I have no issue with that. What i have an issue with is the suggestion (made by the social worker, too) that slapping leads to more serious forms of abuse. There is absolutely no evidence for this. There is, however, plenty of evidence of two other things. Firstly, social workers are missing the most serious cases because of their obsession with cases that aren't abuse in the first place. Secondly, those who abuse kids in the most horrendous ways are not in the slightest bit put off by rules about slapping. JamesYoung
  • Score: 10

8:12pm Thu 1 May 14

westbaywonder says...

Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,.

Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.
Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,. Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL. westbaywonder
  • Score: 8

8:51pm Thu 1 May 14

ksmain says...

westbaywonder wrote:
Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,.

Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.
Is that because the reporting media was not as widespread as it is now? Being a child of the 70s I may possibly agree with you - however nowadays there is far more widespread reporting of these problems now so I rather feel you can't compare the two easily. Certainly kids know their rights far more now and I feel the law/social regulations do little to protect the rest of us from this knowledge. I wonder too how long we can continue to say 'ah heshe's a teenager is he/she really aware of what he/she aware of what he/she is doing' - teenagers do all too well.
[quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,. Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.[/p][/quote]Is that because the reporting media was not as widespread as it is now? Being a child of the 70s I may possibly agree with you - however nowadays there is far more widespread reporting of these problems now so I rather feel you can't compare the two easily. Certainly kids know their rights far more now and I feel the law/social regulations do little to protect the rest of us from this knowledge. I wonder too how long we can continue to say 'ah heshe's a teenager is he/she really aware of what he/she aware of what he/she is doing' - teenagers do all too well. ksmain
  • Score: -2

9:47pm Thu 1 May 14

Bob Goulding says...

JamesYoung wrote:
Bob Goulding wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
fancyabrew wrote:
Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?
Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?
You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-).
Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process).
By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance.
I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.
Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.
Forgive me woodsedge but I think you are being a little smug and idealistic. I too have raised two children successfully but, on a very few occasions, I did feel it necessary, for their own benefit ultimately, to impose my will physically. I did not 'beat them up' nor did I leave a mark, but I did 'grab their attention' at a time when it was necessary to demonstrate who was in charge. Interestingly, neither of them (both now in their late 30's/early 40's and parents themselves) have any negative memories of the incidents and actually support the concept of using 'reasonable force' when faced with unacceptable behavior and/or blatant disrespect from their children. Actually their kids are basically very good but unfortunately they are influenced by some of their peers at school who are less well controlled.

James, I am very much in agreement with you on this and I am appalled to hear that you were charged with battery for slapping your children. Even now (unless the law has changed very recently) parents are allowed to smack children as long as it does not leave a mark. I too would like to see some movement towards a return to controlled corporal punishment using similar guidelines and with strict reporting requirements.
This is the fundamental problem, Bob. The definition of battery (this isn't the legal definition) is harming with intent. The idea that leaving a mark implies that you intended to hurt a child, and not leaving one implies that you did not, is simple idiocy. In my case, i left a red finger mark while breaking up a fight in which one son was wielding a heavy object that could have put his brother in hospital. This happened minutes before school and i sent him to school anyway telling him that if anybody asked, to tell them the truth about what happened. He did. I was astounded sat the response. The social worker was quite literally rabid. She demanded that i take afternoons off work (at the time i worked in Exeter) and then didn't turn up - several times. Her answer - I'll come tomorrow, take tomorrow off too - if you don't, i will report you as uncooperative. She met the kids - without me present - and they told her that slapping was a rare event in our house. She didn't believe them. She spoke to my GP without my permission, and tried to infer that my wife's visits to get painkillers were a veiled attempt at seeking help. When i challenged her on some of the views she expressed, she wrote in her report that i was "aggressive but she didn't feel threatened". Aggression without feeling threatened?. That's just a malicious interpretation of "assertive". If you are familiar with the protocol, you'll know that they also talk to school teachers. My son's told her that he was doing well, but could do better. This is what the teacher told me. That went in the report as "failing to thrive" with the fact that my son was apparently scared of a police officer also inferred as being in some way problematic. The report also said that as a family unit we were not integrated into the community (at the time, we were all active members of a local church, I drove a minibus for two local charities and was a director of another). The worst of it: despite all these factual inaccuracies, she refused to modify her report. Thankfully her conclusion was the same as the police: no threat. She did advise me, however, to step down from one of the charity jobs that i did, because if a child ever made an allegation i'd be in the firing line. I stepped down from all three as the whole incident knocked me for six.
The problem that i have is that inspite of clear evidence that violence perpetuated by children is on the rise, we are governed by a minority who have a view that is simply not substantiated by evidence. They are criminalising fathers and destroying families because of a liberal dogma. It is unnecessary.
Woodsedge's view is of course valid - there are many families that think slapping is ok, and many that don't. I have no issue with that. What i have an issue with is the suggestion (made by the social worker, too) that slapping leads to more serious forms of abuse. There is absolutely no evidence for this.
There is, however, plenty of evidence of two other things. Firstly, social workers are missing the most serious cases because of their obsession with cases that aren't abuse in the first place. Secondly, those who abuse kids in the most horrendous ways are not in the slightest bit put off by rules about slapping.
Hi James, I completely understand your predicament and, in another place, I could share with you the details of a similar injustice that affected close friends and, although not directly involved, family members in a case that resulted in the subject losing his job in the education sector. He was branded a risk to children by social services and police child protection officers on hearsay evidence and gossip from disaffected colleagues. He was a brilliant teacher but had no option but to resign and seek employment in a different sector. He was never charged with or convicted of anything and, a few years later, he was completely exonerated by an independent case review. Sadly, this was too late for him to re-establish his career in education. I’m afraid that this is a classic case of ‘you are damned if you do and you are damned if you didn’t’.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bob Goulding[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fancyabrew[/bold] wrote: Hmm, what would happend if teachers went back to instilling a sence of right and wrong in their pupils, at an early age, and back it up with some discipline?[/p][/quote]Hmm, what would happen if parents installed a sense of right and wrong in their children for teachers to work with?[/p][/quote]You and i argued over a similar point a couple of year ago, funnily enough with Cyril as a major contributor :-). Parents are not allowed to discipline their kids. You can be charged with battery for slapping them (as i was) and risk having rabid social workers interfering in your life for months on end. Those social workers simply do not accept that "the naughty stair" does not work for many kids (my own son demonstrated this for the social worker concerned very effectively, making her very angry in the process). By the time kids from the right kind of families reach school, they have learned that their parents will back them up whatever wrong they commit, based on some idealogical hatred of the police and the desire for a peaceful life at whatever cost. The teachers have no chance. I will be pilloried for saying it, but i think a return to corporal punishment is the way forward. The idea that by banning slapping you can save the Baby Ps of the world is laughable and there is evidence from Sweden that a total slapping ban can result in more, not less, abuse, as parents hold back until they flip.[/p][/quote]Hi James, nice to have someone on here I can have a sensible debate with. That said I don't think we will agree on this one regarding a return to corporal punishment. I cannot comment on your experiences and understand that you are a rational caring member of society that genuinely wants a better life for everyone. That said I raised two children went through the courts for custody following a messy divorce and never ever had a situation where i needed to physically 'correct' either of my two children. I personally believe that you can discipline children without resorting to it being physical, and my two children are now well rounded adults who in turn have given me well rounded grandchildren. As for Child protection Social Workers, all I would suggest to those that concentrate on the headline cases where they do get it wrong, is to walk a day in their shoes and deal with the 99.9% of abused children where they do get it right.[/p][/quote]Forgive me woodsedge but I think you are being a little smug and idealistic. I too have raised two children successfully but, on a very few occasions, I did feel it necessary, for their own benefit ultimately, to impose my will physically. I did not 'beat them up' nor did I leave a mark, but I did 'grab their attention' at a time when it was necessary to demonstrate who was in charge. Interestingly, neither of them (both now in their late 30's/early 40's and parents themselves) have any negative memories of the incidents and actually support the concept of using 'reasonable force' when faced with unacceptable behavior and/or blatant disrespect from their children. Actually their kids are basically very good but unfortunately they are influenced by some of their peers at school who are less well controlled. James, I am very much in agreement with you on this and I am appalled to hear that you were charged with battery for slapping your children. Even now (unless the law has changed very recently) parents are allowed to smack children as long as it does not leave a mark. I too would like to see some movement towards a return to controlled corporal punishment using similar guidelines and with strict reporting requirements.[/p][/quote]This is the fundamental problem, Bob. The definition of battery (this isn't the legal definition) is harming with intent. The idea that leaving a mark implies that you intended to hurt a child, and not leaving one implies that you did not, is simple idiocy. In my case, i left a red finger mark while breaking up a fight in which one son was wielding a heavy object that could have put his brother in hospital. This happened minutes before school and i sent him to school anyway telling him that if anybody asked, to tell them the truth about what happened. He did. I was astounded sat the response. The social worker was quite literally rabid. She demanded that i take afternoons off work (at the time i worked in Exeter) and then didn't turn up - several times. Her answer - I'll come tomorrow, take tomorrow off too - if you don't, i will report you as uncooperative. She met the kids - without me present - and they told her that slapping was a rare event in our house. She didn't believe them. She spoke to my GP without my permission, and tried to infer that my wife's visits to get painkillers were a veiled attempt at seeking help. When i challenged her on some of the views she expressed, she wrote in her report that i was "aggressive but she didn't feel threatened". Aggression without feeling threatened?. That's just a malicious interpretation of "assertive". If you are familiar with the protocol, you'll know that they also talk to school teachers. My son's told her that he was doing well, but could do better. This is what the teacher told me. That went in the report as "failing to thrive" with the fact that my son was apparently scared of a police officer also inferred as being in some way problematic. The report also said that as a family unit we were not integrated into the community (at the time, we were all active members of a local church, I drove a minibus for two local charities and was a director of another). The worst of it: despite all these factual inaccuracies, she refused to modify her report. Thankfully her conclusion was the same as the police: no threat. She did advise me, however, to step down from one of the charity jobs that i did, because if a child ever made an allegation i'd be in the firing line. I stepped down from all three as the whole incident knocked me for six. The problem that i have is that inspite of clear evidence that violence perpetuated by children is on the rise, we are governed by a minority who have a view that is simply not substantiated by evidence. They are criminalising fathers and destroying families because of a liberal dogma. It is unnecessary. Woodsedge's view is of course valid - there are many families that think slapping is ok, and many that don't. I have no issue with that. What i have an issue with is the suggestion (made by the social worker, too) that slapping leads to more serious forms of abuse. There is absolutely no evidence for this. There is, however, plenty of evidence of two other things. Firstly, social workers are missing the most serious cases because of their obsession with cases that aren't abuse in the first place. Secondly, those who abuse kids in the most horrendous ways are not in the slightest bit put off by rules about slapping.[/p][/quote]Hi James, I completely understand your predicament and, in another place, I could share with you the details of a similar injustice that affected close friends and, although not directly involved, family members in a case that resulted in the subject losing his job in the education sector. He was branded a risk to children by social services and police child protection officers on hearsay evidence and gossip from disaffected colleagues. He was a brilliant teacher but had no option but to resign and seek employment in a different sector. He was never charged with or convicted of anything and, a few years later, he was completely exonerated by an independent case review. Sadly, this was too late for him to re-establish his career in education. I’m afraid that this is a classic case of ‘you are damned if you do and you are damned if you didn’t’. Bob Goulding
  • Score: 1

9:26am Fri 2 May 14

dorset & proud says...

westbaywonder wrote:
Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,.

Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.
Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true.

You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm.

Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from?

Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection!
[quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,. Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.[/p][/quote]Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true. You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm. Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from? Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection! dorset & proud
  • Score: 11

10:41am Fri 2 May 14

Bob Goulding says...

dorset & proud wrote:
westbaywonder wrote:
Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,.

Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.
Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true.

You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm.

Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from?

Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection!
Totally agree.
[quote][p][bold]dorset & proud[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,. Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.[/p][/quote]Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true. You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm. Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from? Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection![/p][/quote]Totally agree. Bob Goulding
  • Score: 9

12:45pm Fri 2 May 14

cj07589 says...

dorset & proud wrote:
westbaywonder wrote:
Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,.

Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.
Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true.

You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm.

Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from?

Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection!
Good points mrs m isn't exactly the first civil servant to dream up completely unpractical and unfunded proposals. She isn't the first and I'm sure she won't be the last to come up with crank pot ideas, this one is right up there with Edd sillybands Marxist idea of capping energy prices and rent.
[quote][p][bold]dorset & proud[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,. Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.[/p][/quote]Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true. You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm. Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from? Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection![/p][/quote]Good points mrs m isn't exactly the first civil servant to dream up completely unpractical and unfunded proposals. She isn't the first and I'm sure she won't be the last to come up with crank pot ideas, this one is right up there with Edd sillybands Marxist idea of capping energy prices and rent. cj07589
  • Score: 9

9:45pm Sat 3 May 14

Parkstreetshufle says...

Bob Goulding wrote:
dorset & proud wrote:
westbaywonder wrote:
Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,.

Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.
Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true.

You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm.

Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from?

Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection!
Totally agree.
Let's not forget that there is an almost endless endless line of stories being unearthed about teachers that have abused their positions with children - sad as it is, and I refer most recently to the teacher that killed himself after he was discovered to have spent decades abusing young boys, and the teacher that abducted his pupil when they ran away to Bordeaux. That's just recently.
The death of anyone unnecessarily and violently is an awful thing, but let's not start trying to wind the clock back to some Victorian era where children where it's suddenly acceptable to start beating children again.
This child that killed the teacher is obviously has severe mental problems, but it's a very isolated situation. It doesn't warrant any new measures.
[quote][p][bold]Bob Goulding[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorset & proud[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]westbaywonder[/bold] wrote: Bring back the 1960,s and 70,s way of bringing up kids,never had half the problems we do now ,. Maggie M will jump on any band wagon just for the thrill of being in the local rag,she could be the new Mary Whitehouse ! LOL.[/p][/quote]Teachers were respected, some had fearsome reputations - never attempted to find out if they were true. You learnt not to play up at school, if you did, the teacher would deal with you, followed closely by your parents if they found out. It was a bit of a fear factor but I can say with hand on heart that it's done me no harm. Mrs M's proposals will cost money, lots of money. At a time when budgets are being cut I'd be interested to hear what suggestions she has to provide this extra money - what else shall we cut to install something which, in reality wont work? - Should we abandon plans to build the posh new school? - Should we spend less money on Christmas lights? - What about her last campaign about the dangerous roads? - should we spend money there too and where's that coming from? Interesting Mary Whitehouse reference, looking at Google you're not the first person the make the connection![/p][/quote]Totally agree.[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that there is an almost endless endless line of stories being unearthed about teachers that have abused their positions with children - sad as it is, and I refer most recently to the teacher that killed himself after he was discovered to have spent decades abusing young boys, and the teacher that abducted his pupil when they ran away to Bordeaux. That's just recently. The death of anyone unnecessarily and violently is an awful thing, but let's not start trying to wind the clock back to some Victorian era where children where it's suddenly acceptable to start beating children again. This child that killed the teacher is obviously has severe mental problems, but it's a very isolated situation. It doesn't warrant any new measures. Parkstreetshufle
  • Score: 2

2:44pm Sun 4 May 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

http://www.dailystor
mer.com/almost-1000-
uk-teachers-caught-h
aving-inappropriate-
relationships-with-p
upils/

What they try to hide is that more women are doing it, you don;t see them getting "sensationalised" media coverage though. More than 40 Local authority's refused to disclose how many.
http://www.dailystor mer.com/almost-1000- uk-teachers-caught-h aving-inappropriate- relationships-with-p upils/ What they try to hide is that more women are doing it, you don;t see them getting "sensationalised" media coverage though. More than 40 Local authority's refused to disclose how many. Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 0

3:20pm Sun 4 May 14

woodsedge says...

Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of humanity today! Daily Stormer link takes you to a web site and a fascist called Andrew Anglin.

"known as Andre on his website Total Fascism, tells us why he thinks Fascism, and many of the policies instituted by Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist regime, is the answer to our fast-degenerating society. Among the topics discussed:

Need to put attention on solutions, rather than endless talking on the Internet;

Leaderless revolution vs an organized political party program;

Libertarianism as a Jewish invention;

Why “ruthless” strength is preferable to weak or half-way measures in dealing with the masses;

Discussion of feminism and “women’s rights” from the male and female perspective;

The reasons that obesity, homosexuality and **** should be outlawed;

Why we don’t need competing political parties".
Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of humanity today! Daily Stormer link takes you to a web site and a fascist called Andrew Anglin. "known as Andre on his website Total Fascism, tells us why he thinks Fascism, and many of the policies instituted by Adolf Hitler’s National Socialist regime, is the answer to our fast-degenerating society. Among the topics discussed: Need to put attention on solutions, rather than endless talking on the Internet; Leaderless revolution vs an organized political party program; Libertarianism as a Jewish invention; Why “ruthless” strength is preferable to weak or half-way measures in dealing with the masses; Discussion of feminism and “women’s rights” from the male and female perspective; The reasons that obesity, homosexuality and **** should be outlawed; Why we don’t need competing political parties". woodsedge
  • Score: -4

4:07pm Sun 4 May 14

Sigurd Hoeberth says...

Well i don't identify with those aspects of the site , mistakenly posted that link as a source from Google... However you being you use that as means to side-step the actual issue of course and rant about something. In any event, my mistake for not checking it out better.

This one should suit you ....

http://www.theguardi
an.com/education/201
4/jan/16/teachers-ac
cused-relationship-p
upils-five-years
Well i don't identify with those aspects of the site , mistakenly posted that link as a source from Google... However you being you use that as means to side-step the actual issue of course and rant about something. In any event, my mistake for not checking it out better. This one should suit you .... http://www.theguardi an.com/education/201 4/jan/16/teachers-ac cused-relationship-p upils-five-years Sigurd Hoeberth
  • Score: 6

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree