The State wants your children: parents guilty of "emotional cruelty" to be jailed

Watch
thesabbath
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
Adults convicted of acts of emotional cruelty against children in their care will face the same threat of jail as those guilty of physical neglect, under new laws being considered by ministers.
Parents found guilty could face up to 10 years in prison, the maximum term in child neglect cases.
The change will update existing laws in England and Wales that allow an adult responsible for a child to be prosecuted only if they have deliberately assaulted, abandoned or exposed a child to suffering or injury to their health.
The new offence would make it a crime to do anything that deliberately harmed a child's "physical, intellectual, emotional, social or behavioural development".


http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...se-neglect-law

This could include deliberately ignoring a child, or not showing them any love, over prolonged periods, damaging a child’s emotional development.
Other new offences could include forcing a child to witness domestic violence, making a child a scape goat or forcing degrading punishments upon them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/ch...face-jail.html

my thoughts:

The threat of the "love police" populated by our unaccountable SS (Social[ist] Services) will breed an army of State worshipping teenagers who are willing to denounce their parents at the drop of a hat if they attempt to imbue them with religious moral values, commit a thought crime against far-left progressivism, send them to bed without any supper or refuse to buy them an iPad. The State will side with the children, who get to showcase their knowledge of their "rights" and demonstrate what good citizens they are.

Why is this being done? The State in order to support itself requires clients, individuals who are beholden to it and cannot imagine an existence in which they can support themselves without its beneficence. Strong families counteract a strong State, as the individual's need for its services is drastically reduced. There is also the risk of parents raising their children with unwelcome ideologies such as right-wing politics which are a threat to the inexorable "progress".
2
reply
NoToFeminism
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
Typical example of our nanny cotton wool state. I remember seeing something on skysports news about trying to ban rugby from being played because it's dangerous for kids, I mean no just no.

This kind of stuff pisses me off to the core

The people who come up with these ideas need a slap, a bloody hard one at that. The power of parents are way too limited as it is.
2
reply
vickidc18
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 years ago
#3
Anyone who has been a victim of emotional abuse from from their parents will welcome this. My mother used to call me ugly, no good, and beat me frequently. It wasn't the physical abuse that affected me the most it was the frequent giving of love and taking it away with heartbreaking words, I remember being so scared of her. SS asked me to press charges against for child cruelty when I was 15 but I declined as I still love her and I don't want her in jail I never knew what was happening with her and it's affected me profoundly. I haven't seen her in 3 years and I just started getting over the abuse and I'm 21 now.
2
reply
Aj12
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
I don't really see the issue here? Physically abusing your child and mentally abusing them can have the same long term outcomes.
4
reply
thesabbath
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#5
The idea that a court can rule on something as subjective as "emotional cruelty" is deeply disturbing.

We've already got the profoundly illiberal "hate" component of crimes, punishing wrong thoughts. How on earth can we trust the State to determine the correct way of raising children without "starving them of love" or some such concept?

Just look at how much education has gone downhill since the loony left's teaching methods took over. Who really wants to let them loose on parenting, and jailing those who disagree?
0
reply
Mackay
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
Hm. I'm all for it in theory - but I don't think it's as simple as just jailing the parents. I mean, I went to school with a variety of kids who HATED their parents and would probably do anything to get away from them. There needs to be proper hearings/court cases involving this - it cannot be half-arsed.
1
reply
MindTheGaps
Badges: 17
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
I realise that one has to consider foremost the needs of the child, but I've got to admit, the idea that a parent could be prosecuted for not loving his child enough is disturbing. At best, the idea that the state is there to police something so intimate as our emotional interaction with our families sets a worrying precedent. At worst, it is a sinister, Orwellian attack on the family unit.
0
reply
mmmpie
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#8
Report 6 years ago
#8
Emotional abuse can be far more damaging than physical. I think this is a good thing in principle, although there are some hard questions about implementation to be asked.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
(Original post by thesabbath)

Just look at how much education has gone downhill since the loony left's teaching methods took over. Who really wants to let them loose on parenting, and jailing those who disagree?
Last time I checked it was a Tory government proposing this.
0
reply
TheGeographyGuy
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 6 years ago
#10
Totally appreciate and agree that emotional abuse can be just as debilitating as physical abuse.

My argument would come in the form of how exactly can we impose such a law and exactly where do we draw the line?

Does someone who's parents made them upset for a few days maybe or had an argument with parents now have the right to try and impose criminal action upon their parents?
0
reply
thesabbath
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#11
(Original post by anarchism101)
Last time I checked it was a Tory government proposing this.
A "Tory government" whose leader believes that marriage is between a man and a man. Pull the other one mate. They're deliberately destroying the family to enable State supremacy.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 6 years ago
#12
(Original post by thesabbath)
A "Tory government" whose leader believes that marriage is between a man and a man. Pull the other one mate. They're deliberately destroying the family to enable State supremacy.
Marriage in itself is a way for the state to but in on people's privates life and establish certain values to what a family means.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#13
Report 6 years ago
#13
(Original post by thesabbath)
A "Tory government" whose leader believes that marriage is between a man and a man. Pull the other one mate.
So the only thing that determines whether you're on the left or right is your opinion regarding gay marriage?

They're deliberately destroying the family to enable State supremacy.
Just like all those other totalitarian states that allowed gay marriage?
0
reply
Olie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 6 years ago
#14
Like others, I really don't see the problem, I regularly read stories on here and on other forums of the long-term damage emotional abuse from parents can have on a person, its not a case of the state wanting your children, its a case of the state not letting a parent do what they want and treat their children like crap for years on end, knowing the consequences if they are allowed to do that. Sure, there'll be difficulties in proving it in a court, but its still a positive step against abuse and I find some of the comments on this thread ludicrous, why should parents be allowed to abuse their children, you wouldn't say the same if you had been abused yourself.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Viva Emptiness
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report 6 years ago
#15
I worry about how evidence for this will be collected for a convincing prosecution.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 years ago
#16
Huh? But this isn't about strong families now is it?
It is about extremely destructive ones.
Attachment theory is highly regarded and generally accepted in the academic community, I would like to see you argue against it, please.
If you don't disagree with attachment theory then it is utterly absurd to argue with this policy on anything other than with how it may or may not be implemented.
0
reply
Ripper-Roo
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report 6 years ago
#17
Children aren't the property of their parents to be treated however the parent likes, the parent is responsible for their well being and if they fail to achieve this or intentionally abuse their child, the child needs to be protected.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (514)
33.7%
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (630)
41.31%
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (312)
20.46%
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (69)
4.52%

Watched Threads

View All