The proposed legislation is deliberate abuse that causes harm. That is a child that exhibits severe and persistent adverse effects on its emotional development and a parent that is behaving with the premeditated intention to harm that child and is terrorising or exploiting or corrupting or rejecting or isolating that child. In those circumstances I see nothing wrong with intervention by the state.
The proposed legislation is deliberate abuse that causes harm. That is a child that exhibits severe and persistent adverse effects on its emotional development and a parent that is behaving with the premeditated intention to harm that child and is terrorising or exploiting or corrupting or rejecting or isolating that child. In those circumstances I see nothing wrong with intervention by the state.
All of which is very subjective and difficult to quantify.
I think this law is a good idea. People don't understand what it means. I understand what they means perfectly. Emotional abuse is the parent bullying the child and or manipulating them, using them and not treating them like a human being. It's not about not being allowed to punish a child. And every parent slips up and says something they regret to their child, that is not emotional abuse.
I read a book recently about a boy who was clearly emotionally abused. His mother berated him for not being able to speak, shouted at for making mistakes, never took him out anywhere, and locked him in his room alone for long periods of time. But he was cared for in every other way. nice clothes, good food, the best toys money could buy.
The law will mean that people like that woman will have to answer for their crimes. And I did feel sorry for her because she had post natal depression. But she should have sought help for her son and herself instead of letting it get that far.
The proffesionals weren't able to intervene because she hadn't broken the law.
The law will mean that people like that woman will have to answer for their crimes. And I did feel sorry for her because she had post natal depression. But she should have sought help for her son and herself instead of letting it get that far.
The proffesionals weren't able to intervene because she hadn't broken the law.
It's interesting that this a law that will possibly affect women more than men.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35192256
The legislation will target those who subject spouses, partners and family members to psychological and emotional torment
Comments
All of which is very subjective and difficult to quantify.
I read a book recently about a boy who was clearly emotionally abused. His mother berated him for not being able to speak, shouted at for making mistakes, never took him out anywhere, and locked him in his room alone for long periods of time. But he was cared for in every other way. nice clothes, good food, the best toys money could buy.
The proffesionals weren't able to intervene because she hadn't broken the law.
That could see IDS doing time - so pretty unlikely.
It's interesting that this a law that will possibly affect women more than men.
It's already a factor in child protection. If the civil law can interpret it effectively, I don't see why the criminal law can't.
Well why not just make all civil law the same as criminal law then?
Civil law focuses on protecting the child, rather than punishing the parents.
Sounds like it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35192256
The legislation will target those who subject spouses, partners and family members to psychological and emotional torment
How about a law that criminalises the abuses of the state against the individual?