Mom's discipline not abuse, Isle judges rule

Submitted by anthony on Sat, 2007-08-25 18:51

Story here.

Here's the million dollar question: What if it was dad that abused his daughter using the same methods as this mother? Excerpt:

'The Hawai'i Supreme Court issued a major ruling last week on the question: At what point does the use of corporal punishment cross the line to criminal child abuse?

In a 3-2 decision, the high court ruled that a mother was not guilty of child abuse for hitting her 14-year-old daughter with a backpack, a plastic hanger, a small brush and the plastic handle of a tool. The high court reversed a jury's verdict that had convicted the mother.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

NOT! Women are de facto aristocrats in the 18th century sense. They are above the law or laws have to be bent to allow for their social priviledge. The only suprise in this tale is that a big aristocrat attacked a little aristocrat. This implies that women get their aristocratic status later in life perhaps after puberty.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Luek on Sun, 2007-08-26 00:21

If she hit a coworker, boyfriend, or man on the street, with these same items, she wouldn't be found guilty of assault or abuse either. Whereas a man patting his daughter's behind firmly would be found guilty. At least the system is pretty consistent in its bias, and therefore predictable, whether the involved party is a parent, stranger, or other.
-ax

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by axolotl on Mon, 2007-08-27 00:21

I think the title of the article should have been "Mom's Abuse Declared Discipline"

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by blaze4metal on Tue, 2007-08-28 14:08