EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:29 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:02 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1340
Wayne Stollings wrote:
wijim wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I do notice that "beating" with a shovel is lumped in with killing an animal. I have had to kill animals and have have to use such an object to do so in an emergency BUT I made sure my sons were not able to see that level of violence associated with their pet. You may not believe it is a problem, but that does not make it a universal truth as seems to be implied in these later posts.


so if your sons made the choice at a mature 9 years old to watch and say goodbye to their beloved pet as it passed, you wouldn't allow that. its not how i parent, but it's your choice in how you raise your kids wayne.


I just pointed out that putting a pet down is considerably different from beating it head in with a shovel by any definition. The children who are mature enough to say good-by to a pet that is being euthanized and to witness that passing may not be mature enough to witness the more violent method. The posts seem to be lumping all types of euthanasia into one group, which is not the case. The type of euthanasia would be critical to the determination of whether a child should be allowed to witness the act.

Quote:
i however, see my daughter still loves me, still seeks my advice, still wants me to help coach her basketball team (even though i know jack shit about basketball strategies..lol) and still takes my advice in dealing with her cat. as well,l she still achieves at a high level scholastically, still puts forth incredible levels of emotion in her poetry and writing, still likes to be a girl in every sense, still likes archery, still has an interest in hunting, still has the responsible nature to do chores without having to be told.


That is very good, but there could still be scars that could affect her at some point in her life. I just would not want to have a child take that chance, myself. I do not see anything wrong with any other parent taking that same position. There may not be a problem with anyone taking another position, but there is a risk.

Quote:
but he is not mature enough to be responsible for his pets, and i would consider sheltering him from witnessing a shovel killing of a pet, but he does not have pets yet that he is soley responsible for, so that is not an issue.


That is your choice as a parent. I am not sure that a shovel killing of a pet is something most children should witness. If you believe your children are different it is your choice, but that is in no way a standard for anyone else.



wayne my daughter watched a surgery tv show last night....it was on hip replacement. thats a pretty violent display as the surgeon used a dewalt drill with a ball rasp on it as he reamed out the pelvic socket. would wayne's law considered that child abuse? or would dr stollings consider that my daughter "his patient" is being scarred because of her interest in that as well?

_________________
lately i been thinkin' aunt betty stopped her blinkin'....soon she'll be a stinkin'..........my deceased mother in law speaking of her aunt who had died.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:04 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1340
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I do notice that "beating" with a shovel is lumped in with killing an animal. I have had to kill animals and have have to use such an object to do so in an emergency BUT I made sure my sons were not able to see that level of violence associated with their pet. You may not believe it is a problem, but that does not make it a universal truth as seems to be implied in these later posts.


euthanization by shovel (or similar implement)has been something you are ok with at some point wayne obviously as you mentioned it early on. when will you let your sons know that its ok in some instances? or is that something you do knowing it is wrong for you to do so you dont want your sons* to ever be exposed to it.


eta: *like alcoholism or something...lol

_________________
lately i been thinkin' aunt betty stopped her blinkin'....soon she'll be a stinkin'..........my deceased mother in law speaking of her aunt who had died.


Last edited by wijim on Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:28 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 10701
Location: S. Fla
Barb the gig is UP. And I won't be answering your email (s). [-X


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:33 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:34 am
Posts: 6321
Location: Texas
Grace wrote:
Barb the gig is UP. And I won't be answering your email (s). [-X


Well, now this is interesting.

_________________
"Yes like I said it all boils down to morals. What you think is right doesn't make a person wrong because they think different ;)" X-Black


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 4:35 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1340
Grace wrote:
Barb the gig is UP. And I won't be answering your email (s). [-X


oh grace you're just misrepresenting.






cept not.

_________________
lately i been thinkin' aunt betty stopped her blinkin'....soon she'll be a stinkin'..........my deceased mother in law speaking of her aunt who had died.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 6:32 pm 
Online
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
wijim wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
wijim wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I do notice that "beating" with a shovel is lumped in with killing an animal. I have had to kill animals and have have to use such an object to do so in an emergency BUT I made sure my sons were not able to see that level of violence associated with their pet. You may not believe it is a problem, but that does not make it a universal truth as seems to be implied in these later posts.


so if your sons made the choice at a mature 9 years old to watch and say goodbye to their beloved pet as it passed, you wouldn't allow that. its not how i parent, but it's your choice in how you raise your kids wayne.


I just pointed out that putting a pet down is considerably different from beating it head in with a shovel by any definition. The children who are mature enough to say good-by to a pet that is being euthanized and to witness that passing may not be mature enough to witness the more violent method. The posts seem to be lumping all types of euthanasia into one group, which is not the case. The type of euthanasia would be critical to the determination of whether a child should be allowed to witness the act.

Quote:
i however, see my daughter still loves me, still seeks my advice, still wants me to help coach her basketball team (even though i know jack shit about basketball strategies..lol) and still takes my advice in dealing with her cat. as well,l she still achieves at a high level scholastically, still puts forth incredible levels of emotion in her poetry and writing, still likes to be a girl in every sense, still likes archery, still has an interest in hunting, still has the responsible nature to do chores without having to be told.


That is very good, but there could still be scars that could affect her at some point in her life. I just would not want to have a child take that chance, myself. I do not see anything wrong with any other parent taking that same position. There may not be a problem with anyone taking another position, but there is a risk.

Quote:
but he is not mature enough to be responsible for his pets, and i would consider sheltering him from witnessing a shovel killing of a pet, but he does not have pets yet that he is soley responsible for, so that is not an issue.


That is your choice as a parent. I am not sure that a shovel killing of a pet is something most children should witness. If you believe your children are different it is your choice, but that is in no way a standard for anyone else.



wayne my daughter watched a surgery tv show last night....it was on hip replacement. thats a pretty violent display as the surgeon used a dewalt drill with a ball rasp on it as he reamed out the pelvic socket. would wayne's law considered that child abuse? or would dr stollings consider that my daughter "his patient" is being scarred because of her interest in that as well?


Ummm where did I ever mention anything about child abuse? I mentioned that most children should not witness their pet being beaten to death, including my own. I do not see surgery in the same category a bludgeoning, but if you do that is your choice.

I have a few friends in the medical profession and there have been a few discussions on the later mental trauma surfacing in both children and adults. What you got was just a bit of advice on something that may be seen in the future based on those discussions, not a diagnosis.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 6:35 pm 
Online
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
wijim wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I do notice that "beating" with a shovel is lumped in with killing an animal. I have had to kill animals and have have to use such an object to do so in an emergency BUT I made sure my sons were not able to see that level of violence associated with their pet. You may not believe it is a problem, but that does not make it a universal truth as seems to be implied in these later posts.


euthanization by shovel (or similar implement)has been something you are ok with at some point wayne obviously as you mentioned it early on. when will you let your sons know that its ok in some instances? or is that something you do knowing it is wrong for you to do so you dont want your sons* to ever be exposed to it.


eta: *like alcoholism or something...lol


Yes, in an emergency I have no problem with it. I have no problem with your situation either. I did point out the generalization of not exposing children to such a brutal method was not consistent with the norm. I would not want any more people than necessary exposed to it, myself, but that would be a normal wish to most people.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:22 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:25 pm
Posts: 825
Location: Georgia
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I mentioned that most children should not witness their pet being beaten to death...


I don't see what Jim did as a "pet being beaten to death" in a negative (i.e., abusive) way.

I see it as using a shovel to bring about final death to an animal already on death's door, euthanizing an animal who's just about there anyway

Since Jim and his daughter discussed it, it's clear that his daughter could never perceive what he did as him having engaged in beating a pet to death in an abusive manner, and that's what's important, that his daughter understands that her father does not "beat up on animals for the thrill of it" and that he took care of euthing the animal himself. It's for sure the cat didn't care one way or another, whether his death came by natural body shutdown, shovel, or chemical shot, not since he was already doing death gasping.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 8:26 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:25 pm
Posts: 825
Location: Georgia
Grace wrote:
Barb the gig is UP. And I won't be answering your email (s). [-X



"Krist on a krutch" a clear give away? :D

So, now the question is: Does she want to be caught, or is she simply incapable of staying away from using phraseology used when posting as her more familiar 4-letter handle?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:25 pm 
Online
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Bean wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I mentioned that most children should not witness their pet being beaten to death...


I don't see what Jim did as a "pet being beaten to death" in a negative (i.e., abusive) way.

I see it as using a shovel to bring about final death to an animal already on death's door, euthanizing an animal who's just about there anyway

Since Jim and his daughter discussed it, it's clear that his daughter could never perceive what he did as him having engaged in beating a pet to death in an abusive manner, and that's what's important, that his daughter understands that her father does not "beat up on animals for the thrill of it" and that he took care of euthing the animal himself. It's for sure the cat didn't care one way or another, whether his death came by natural body shutdown, shovel, or chemical shot, not since he was already doing death gasping.


Why does everyone want to add "abusive" to what I posted? Where did I ever mention abuse? I believe the act of beating an animal to death regardless of the motives is a potential problem for children to process. The reference was only to the possible hidden scaring her being a witness to that may have caused. It is only good parenting to be aware of the possibility of such a problem in case signs begin to appear.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:53 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:25 pm
Posts: 825
Location: Georgia
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I believe the act of beating an animal to death regardless of the motives is a potential problem for children to process.


It certainly can be for any given individual child, but that doesn't translate into it always being so as far as all children, primarily because not every child of this or that particular age is on the exact same emotional and intellectual level.

Plus, motive/intent certainly seems to play an important part in establishing whether a certain action towards an animal is abuse/cruelty, so it stands to reason that the motive/intent plays a part in explaining why a shovel is being applied to the head of an animal.

If a child saw his father hitting a bear with a shovel in self defense, I would think that action wouldn't have a traumatic effect on the child, IF it's made clear after the fact that it was self defense.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:03 pm 
Online
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Bean wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I believe the act of beating an animal to death regardless of the motives is a potential problem for children to process.


It certainly can be for any given individual child, but that doesn't translate into it always being so as far as all children, primarily because not every child of this or that particular age is on the exact same emotional and intellectual level.

Plus, motive/intent certainly seems to play an important part in establishing whether a certain action towards an animal is abuse/cruelty, so it stands to reason that the motive/intent plays a part in explaining why a shovel is being applied to the head of an animal.

If a child saw his father hitting a bear with a shovel in self defense, I would think that action wouldn't have a traumatic effect on the child, IF it's made clear after the fact that it was self defense.


So why "misrepresent" my posts then? :lol: I never said there was anything other than a potential problem and that most parents (and child developmental specialists) would not support children being exposed to this type of euthanasia even if the children were to be exposed to euthanasia or even animal slaughter. This was in response to the apparent references to this being a "normal" action and part of the reason children were not as strong now. It is an extreme circumstance and as such not one most children would be expected to handle.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:34 pm 
Offline
Member with 500 Posts!
Member with 500 Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:25 pm
Posts: 825
Location: Georgia
Bean wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I believe the act of beating an animal to death regardless of the motives is a potential problem for children to process.


It certainly can be for any given individual child, but that doesn't translate into it always being so as far as all children, primarily because not every child of this or that particular age is on the exact same emotional and intellectual level.

Plus, motive/intent certainly seems to play an important part in establishing whether a certain action towards an animal is abuse/cruelty, so it stands to reason that the motive/intent plays a part in explaining why a shovel is being applied to the head of an animal.

If a child saw his father hitting a bear with a shovel in self defense, I would think that action wouldn't have a traumatic effect on the child, IF it's made clear after the fact that it was self defense.


Wayne
Quote:
So why "misrepresent" my posts then? :lol: I never said there was anything other than a potential problem


Sorry, I didn't mean to misrepresent anything you wrote, but what do you believe I'm misrepresenting?

Wayne
Quote:
and that most parents (and child developmental specialists) would not support children being exposed to this type of euthanasia even if the children were to be exposed to euthanasia or even animal slaughter. This was in response to the apparent references to this being a "normal" action and part of the reason children were not as strong now.


Yet, "most parents (and child developmental specialists)" aren't the end-all, be-all of what ALL children are capable of handling, and that was my original point.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:42 pm 
Online
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20603
Location: Southeastern US
Bean wrote:
Bean wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I believe the act of beating an animal to death regardless of the motives is a potential problem for children to process.


It certainly can be for any given individual child, but that doesn't translate into it always being so as far as all children, primarily because not every child of this or that particular age is on the exact same emotional and intellectual level.

Plus, motive/intent certainly seems to play an important part in establishing whether a certain action towards an animal is abuse/cruelty, so it stands to reason that the motive/intent plays a part in explaining why a shovel is being applied to the head of an animal.

If a child saw his father hitting a bear with a shovel in self defense, I would think that action wouldn't have a traumatic effect on the child, IF it's made clear after the fact that it was self defense.


Wayne
Quote:
So why "misrepresent" my posts then? :lol: I never said there was anything other than a potential problem


Sorry, I didn't mean to misrepresent anything you wrote, but what do you believe I'm misrepresenting?


You keep adding the "abuse/cruelty" references where I have clearly never made it an issue in any way.

Quote:
Wayne
Quote:
and that most parents (and child developmental specialists) would not support children being exposed to this type of euthanasia even if the children were to be exposed to euthanasia or even animal slaughter. This was in response to the apparent references to this being a "normal" action and part of the reason children were not as strong now.


Yet, "most parents (and child developmental specialists)" aren't the end-all, be-all of what ALL children are capable of handling, and that was my original point.


No, and none will know if the child can handle it until it is too late either ...

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 8:58 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:45 pm
Posts: 1340
Wayne Stollings wrote:
wijim wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I do notice that "beating" with a shovel is lumped in with killing an animal. I have had to kill animals and have have to use such an object to do so in an emergency BUT I made sure my sons were not able to see that level of violence associated with their pet. You may not believe it is a problem, but that does not make it a universal truth as seems to be implied in these later posts.


euthanization by shovel (or similar implement)has been something you are ok with at some point wayne obviously as you mentioned it early on. when will you let your sons know that its ok in some instances? or is that something you do knowing it is wrong for you to do so you dont want your sons* to ever be exposed to it.


eta: *like alcoholism or something...lol


Yes, in an emergency I have no problem with it. I have no problem with your situation either. I did point out the generalization of not exposing children to such a brutal method was not consistent with the norm. I would not want any more people than necessary exposed to it, myself, but that would be a normal wish to most people.



i wasn't aware that you found no issue with my situation. you never stated that in the posts in which you described "scarring". (now before someone states that i only called wayne out on that.......) please recall i called archer out on his view in this thread too.

eta:
Grace wrote:
Archer wrote:
sianblooz wrote:
Are you saying that watching your father beat your kitten to death without batting an eye means you're being raised to be a "man" ? a "woman"?


It doesn't matter what age she is. If she is old enough to have a kitten, then she is old enough to see it die. That's all a part of the responsibilities. I don't expect her not to react, but if she wants the cat, she needs to be prepared for things like that.




I don't believe that's the rule. I think it's up to the child to decide and yes it depends on the child's age and/or maturity. Wijim's daughter apparently was old enough to decide for herself. Whether she wishes to witness such an incident again only she can answer. I still can't watch an animal die - whether it's on TV or real life. When we had to euthanize our 14 year old cat due to cancer, I stayed with him right before the needle, and had to walk out of the room and leave my husband with him. I was afraid he might fight the drug and I didn't want to remember him struggling, and I was also afraid I'd be too upset in front ot the cat which would upset him. Not everyone is made from the same mold. If a child wants a pet, that doesn't mean the child should be prepared to witness its death. Understand its death, yes.


wijim wrote:
archer i can tend to take grace's comments and yours and make a case for each. archer and i obviously come from the same place in regards to opinions on kids and pets. if my daughter were not mature enough...in my house, she would not have a pet of her own. i felt she was mature enough to accept death as a potential issue with a pet of hers. thats why she was allowed to have pets. which ties with what you say here grace.

but archer you gotta realize some parents will allow their kids to have pets prior to their being old enoug to accept sucj concepts....i dont understand that reasoning either....but who am i to judge those parents...it's their life to raise their kids as they see fit as well.



maybe "calling out" is a stronger term than i intend...just noting that...maybe "spoke to" would fit better

_________________
lately i been thinkin' aunt betty stopped her blinkin'....soon she'll be a stinkin'..........my deceased mother in law speaking of her aunt who had died.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot] and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group