Continuing the no spanking debate with Dr. Laura.

I wrote in a previous blog that some local lawmaker are considering working and passing legislation that would effectively ban spanking. I have followed this story and even saw the lawmaker who was pushing this legislation on The O'Reilly Factor. I was really surprised that the lawmaker, Rep. Jay Kaufman, basically back pedaled on the issue saying that he was only doing this for a constituent (what?). A recent story on the Sun Chronicle Online noted that Rep. Kaufman "signed the bill as a petitioner for his constituent, not as a supporter". Why would anything be brought forth by a lawmaker that he or she doesn't support. Seems a little shady to me. The Chronicle story also has this quote (which is good news) - "Area lawmakers say the bill to ban corporal punishment on children under 18 is expected to go to the "round file."" Thank goodness there is still some common sense on Beacon Hill.

So what was the real issue here? Well it was notionally child abuse. As the Chronicle story states:

Kaufman said the bill is not designed to stop parents from disciplining their children to maintain order or control, but the goal is to stop child abuse.

More than 19,000 cases of abuse have been reported to the Department of Social Services during the last three months.

So ok, if child abuse is a concern (and who is not against child abuse?) I offer this solution from Dr. Laura.

On her blog post entitled "Child Abuse More Likely in Shack-Up Relationships" she writes:

Children living in homes with unrelated adults are nearly fifty times as likely to die of inflicted injuries as are children living with their bio-parents. (Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, 2005). Children of single parents had a 77% greater risk of being harmed by physical abuse than children living with both parents (National Incidence Study, 1996). Children living in stepfamilies, or with single parents are at higher risk of physical or sexual assault than children living with their bio-parents (University of New Hampshire’s Crimes Against Children Research Center). Girls whose parents divorce are at significantly higher risk of sexual assault, regardless of which bio-parent they live with (Family Law, Washington and Lee University).

So it seems to be one potential way to stop abuse is to encourage and promote stable relationships between a man and a woman and to stop people from entering into this "casual" relationships that are usually based on something fleeting whether it be sex, the feeling of being with someone just to be with someone, a person thinks that he or she is owed happiness by society, or the other tired amoral beliefs that a person gets from Reality TV, Sex Therapists, Liberals, or Soap Operas. Maybe I should send Dr. Laura's post to Rep Jay Kaufman and he can introduce it to the legislature. It is at least a better proposal than the one that has the Government interfering and intervening in an area that it should remain disengaged with. Isn't it about the children?

I wonder if I would get a shot at appearing on the O'Reilly Factor?

Outspoken Roman