Football, Kids, Sports

Child Abuse Isn't Really Against The Law

Beating your kids is more about the injuries than your actions.

By  
on

Louie C.K. has the definitive statement on the legal standing of corporal punishment (it’s Louie C.K., so I shouldn’t have to tell you NSFW):

” ‘Stop hitting me, you’re huge. You’re a giant and I can’t defend myself.’…

Kids are the only people in the world that you are allowed to hit… They’re the most vulnerable and they’re the most destroyed by being hit but it’s totally okay to hit them. And they’re the only ones. If you hit a dog, they’ll f***ing put you in jail for that s**t. You can’t hit a person unless you can prove that they were trying to kill you. But a little tiny person with a head this big who trusts you implicitly, f**k ’em, who gives a s**t, let’s all hit them…

Let me say this, if you have kids and you do hit your kids, I totally get it. I’m not judging. I get it. My mom hit me. I don’t hit my kids… I’m not better than my mom, it’s because she was poor and I have money… I work two hours a week sometimes.”

That’s pretty much the law right there folks. Of course people shouldn’t hit their kids. It’s freaking barbaric. It’s proven to be an ineffective and damaging form of discipline.

But the law accepts the premise that some people are going to hit their children from time to time. Once you’re there, once you abandon a “zero tolerance” policy on corporal punishment for children, it’s exceedingly difficult to parse “reasonable” from “abusive” punishments…

On Friday, famous running back Adrian Peterson was indicted and charged with beating his child with “criminal negligence or recklessly.” Peterson allegedly disciplined his four-year-old son with a switch… which is our nice way of saying that Peterson beat a child with a tree branch.

Sponsored

Either we’re going to live in a society where beating children with trees is illegal, or we’re not, and we are certainly not. The Texas prosecutors pursuing the case against Peterson explained Texas’s laws this way to CNN:

“Obviously, parents are entitled to discipline their children as they see fit, except for when that discipline exceeds what the community would say is reasonable,” the district attorney said. “And so, a grand jury, having indicted this case, looked at the injuries that were inflicted upon this child and determined that that discipline was not reasonable.”

Notice that with that statement the prosecutor is trying to assuage the fears of the Texas community that their “right” to beat the crap out of their kids will not be threatened by these actions against Peterson. They’re not saying that Peterson was wrong to use weaponized roughage against a four-year-old. They’re arguing that maybe, just maybe, Peterson hit a little too hard. As if maybe Peterson went “all day” instead of taking a breather.

Texas prosecutors are essentially saying, “Let us say this, if you have kids and you do hit your kids, we totally get it. We’re not judging.” Peterson is probably in trouble more because he’s rich enough to make news. If he beat his kid this way on his dusty homestead in East Texas after a long day of farming… I wonder if this case would even have been pursued.

I don’t accept the premise that hitting your kids is reasonable. But the law does. It makes child abuse more about the extent of the injuries than the inappropriateness of the actions.

Sponsored

Vikings star Adrian Peterson turns himself in, freed on bail [CNN]

Topics

, , , , ,