Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Oh gawd here we go again, pick on the muslims when if anyone actually bothers to read the article it's not about muslim schools but actually about a loophole which means the smacking ban law exempts schools where children attend for less than 12.5 hours per week.

Way to go daily mail!!!!

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Isn't madrasahs the majority of all those schools where children attend for less than 12.5 hours per week?

you could see it as the Daily Mail is wanting to protect them Muslims rather than pick on them.

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

wpuld this loophole apply christian to sunday schools as well?

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

I think it applies to any schools where you attend for less than 12.5 hours per week.

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

then why have the mail targeted muslim schools and not mentioned any others ?...oh wait i know ..cos it's the mail ,and i feel sure that the mail have run this story or similar before ,i'll have a dig around

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Another anti-Muslim topic? What. Are. The. Chances.

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

The chances of what? the chances that because it's got the word Muslim in then the loophole should stay open?

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

The chances of another topic being Anti-Muslim (even though in this case it isn't limited to Muslims but what are facts when compared to having a go at a group of people you don't like eh?)

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

From the OP article
What experts? Or has that word just been put in to give it credibility?

and

The Daily Mail would love that, wouldn't they? "Bloody bleeding-heart liberal interfering government, stopping us disciplining our kids! Who do they think they are?"

---------- Post added at 10:59 ---------- Previous post was at 10:58 ----------

No, the fact that it also applies to Christian Sunday Schools, probably Jewish part-time education facilities, and the chances that you and the Daily Mail have focused on the Muslim aspect.:dozey:

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

but the loophole isn't just for muslims is it ,so it isn't "1 law for us ,but not for others " it's the same law for everyone

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Do the parents have any say or rights if their child is a victim of this loophole?

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

There you go, bringing facts into one of Gary's anti-Muslim threads - tchhhh! :D

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

i know, i must go and chastise myself know :D maybe some light smacking is in order:rolleyes:

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Yes - they can remove them from the educational establishment (and from their relatives homes, as it is the same "loophole" that covers both areas).

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

You're not reading the thread properly :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 11:08 ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 ----------

I know that. why do you think I put others and not Muslims? :dozey:
I think the Daily Mail have used the Muslim word as they are the majority that this affects the most.

---------- Post added at 11:09 ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 ----------

But the member of staff or parent cannot be held accountable for their actions? they are effectively covered by law?

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

so who are the "others" that this law doesn't apply to but we have to abide by ?:confused:


are we discussing the fact that this loophole exists at all or the fact that muslims might/might not be smacking children at a specific type of school ?

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

The others are those that are allowed to 'smack' as opposed to the others that are not ? :confused:

Anyone you want. we can debate either.

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

I love the sound of "back-pedalling" in a thread.....:D

Your original quotes from the Daily Mail highlighted this supposed issue solely in relation to Muslims.

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

That's probably due to the fact that that's what they published.
what's the point of being PC and missing it all out and going for the Christians? :confused:

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

but we've already established that ALL schools with pupils who attend under a certain amount of hours are allowed to smack NOT just muslim so there are no "others"


then it shouldn't be allowed in ANY school ,the only people allowed to smack children should the parents if they choose to adopt that stance

re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Re: 1 law for us, but not for others.
 

Yes. I remember you asking.

Then should we close this loophole?

Re: 1 law for us, but not for others.
 

refer to my above post ;)




but now it aint got no muslims in it ;)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Gary, it's not being PC to include all the facts (even the ones you don't like).

Re: 1 law for us, but not for others.
 

Conga rats. we have 1 person that has decided between for and against. if only politics was this easy :)

It never did have any muslims in it ;)

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

Sorry. from now on I'll quote the whole lot. it will save me from being accused of being biased, but might get me being told off for not quoting a little bit and a link for the rest :)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Whilst everyone is falling over themselves to try and extricate the I word from this thread... Anyone actually know why there is an exemption in the first place?

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

The original title is all what was needed to see that you are biased and selectively pulled up on the muslim issue instead of the whole article. :(

---------- Post added at 11:50 ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 ----------

Trust Punky to do one of the first genuine questions in this thread. I personally have no idea as to why the exemption..

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Good point. after all a school is a school. no matter how many hours you attend it.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Reading the article though the quoted muslim incidents isn't smacking, but instead blatant physical assualt

This isn't using the exemption but actually breaking the law :(

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

The original title is Double standards row as Ed Balls refuses to ban smacking at mosque schools to avoid 'upsetting Muslim sensitivities'

I'd lose no matter what.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

I'd love to see the quote for that headline.. Or are they just claims from 3rd parties??? Perhaps yet again the Daily Mail picking quotes out of thin air to support an article

:rolleyes:

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Which in pointing that out you could be considered anti-muslim. unless you choose to see past it and see it for what it is.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

well i did read this morning on a different site (i will try to find it again )that closing this loophole would also mean that a smacking ban would also have have to be imposed on grand mothers ect aswell ,don't see the connection myself and i will try to confirm that


here you go

The corporal punishment exemption also covers Sunday schools, home tutors and other people who are considered to be acting 'in loco parentis'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243871/Double-standards-row-Ed-Balls-refuses-ban-smacking-mosque-schools-avoid-upsetting-Muslim-sensitivities.html#ixzz0csClFW9K

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Once again, Gary, you are being selective with your interpretation of facts.

Kymmy pointed out that if those incidents had occurred, it would be breaking the law, not using a "loophole" - valid point.

You, however, only highlighted the alleged issue in regards to Muslims, even though the Daily Mail article also pointed out
You don't have to quote the whole article, as you intimated (boo hoo, everyone's picking on poor Gary....) - you just appear extremely selective in your quotes.;)

(as I pointed out before - what "experts"?)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

That's the same link as the original? :)

---------- Post added at 12:54 ---------- Previous post was at 12:50 ----------

I'm not being selective in anything. you're being selective in quoting what you want to quote now to go with your part in the debate.
so I do actually have to quote the whole article. even if it's just to please you :)

Don't know if these count.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Anyhoo, Gary - I thought you were in favour of smacking as a form of discipline?

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

I am. just not in favour of abuse.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

i know i just read the whole article ,yes i even read the bit at the bottom that the mail hope people don't get to cos that's were they tend to put the facts;)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

So you're equating the fact that you put in your own title that could be considered biased against muslims with my facts gleamed from the articles..

PMSL.....

Thank you ever so much for displaying your viewpoint here and making it clearer to everyone your stance on this originally anti-muslim thread..

:clap: :clap:

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

What?

What? :confused:

You mentioned the word Muslims. I said if 'I' had done that I would be accused of making clear my stance to everyone. just like the way you just did.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

I think she's pointing out your prejudices, Gary.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

hmm so now people want to stop parents being able to give those they leave their kids with the right to punish their child in the ay they believe is right and lawful ?

---------- Post added at 13:14 ---------- Previous post was at 13:10 ----------

not in favour of abuse myself but smacking isn't automatically abuse in law or in real life

i have never been in favour of its use in mainstream schooling as parents there often have little idea of who the teacher is

but in situations where they choose the teacher and mostly know them well then they should be able to hand over thier parental choices to the person they are giving loco parentis too

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Oh. I didn't know that. :rolleyes:

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

i think Kymmy is trying to say that you have dug a reeeeeely big hole for yourself Gary , bet you want to go back to bed and start again later now :D

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Who's they? the parents or the teachers?

In the article there are instances of abuse. smacking was further up. you have to do what martyh did, and read the whole article :)

---------- Post added at 13:22 ---------- Previous post was at 13:19 ----------

I'll explain. if I just said what Kymmy had said and nothing else. I would be accused of being biased/prejudiced for not mentioning anything else in the whole article. because I pointed out the thing about the Muslims and nothing else. :)

It was like 'actually it is about the Muslims. reading the article through the quoted muslim incidents isn't smacking, but instead blatant physical assualt'

Who's going to watch the dinner if I go back to bed? :D

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

a the parents ( i know my sentences are often confusing to me too lol )

b yep will give you i didnt really cover anything any real abuse a school / babysitter may be doing but then that doesn't need a change in the law does it

already if any of those schools or babysitters that the parents have left in charge of their children break the law in regards to abusing rather than just chastising within the law then they are subject to the full force of child abuse law already

if the paper has documented evidence of that sort of abuse they should notify the appropriate authorities rather than just publishing an article which is more about raising tensions than reporting news

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Question?Does anyone connected with these schools have to have to have a CRB certificate or it's equivalent?

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

well said that man :clap:a better story would have been about child abuse in after school clubs/sunday schools/mosque schools ect if it genuinely exists and there have been rumours for a number of years, but i can't recall any real investigation by a paper backed up with prosecutions .If the Mail are really concerened then they should do all of society a service and conduct a proper investigation backed up with facts/photos and a few prosecutions reguardless of race/religion and if it turns out that muslim schools are the biggest offenders then so be it ,at least they would have proven facts to offset any charge of racial bias

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

i should imagine they do if they charge for the service but if its free then most likely not

remember the furore the other way when it was suggested that those looking after other peoples kids needed them ;)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Well I thought it was cases like this that were supposed to be the ones that the new form of CRB was supposed to cover(not people's child care arrangements for job sharing or grandparents caring for their own grandchildren).

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Looking at the DM article, I thought I would do a little digging.

It would appear the quotes from the main players are from a number of years ago

a) can't find anything for David Laws, the LibDem MP, on his or the Lib Dems website (or by googling "David Laws" & "madrasah" (except the DM article and blogs discussing it)).
b) as a) searching for "Ed Balls" & "madrasa"
c) Ann Cryer's comments are paraphrased from March 2006, when she was commenting on (and supporting) a report produced by Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui (also quoted in the DM report)
c) Irfan Chishti's comments were from December 2008 Times article

So, is there any foundation in this DM story, or is is just rehashing old stuff?

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

yeah ,i hinted at that earlier it does seem to be a space filler in the abcense of any new muslim related stories

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Here are the clues we need to focus on.

Mr Balls was last week urged to close a legal loophole

and

Lib Dem schools spokesman David Laws, who is spearheading the campaign to close the smacking loophole

We can take that as David Laws urged Mr Balls last week to close the loophole.

I'll help you out when I have time :)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

well i think that is harder to do than first appears because it would mean removing grans /aunts /uncles and anybody incuding some types of schools from being granted loco parentis status .Admittedly it wouldn't be imposible but would require a great deal of carefull thought

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

i think ( looking through the ton of papers they sent out on this lol ) from the way i read it if its part of say a charity run service then they would need to be but if the school bit be it sunday school or other faith based school is run for less than the stated 12.5 hours it comes under the same rules as other parents looking after your kids for no reward

personally even though i don't support the stop smacking campaign i would still insist on the people running those things being CRBed but then again maybe the parents know the person running the school personally

and although my faith doesn't run these sort of schools we do sometimes run bible studies at a members home for younger ones and there we wouldn't CRB but we do have rules on there being at least two adults present and it mostly wouldn't be one to one tuition

---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:27 ----------

so again its really about this anti smacking campaign and not about any particular faith groups who are acting with in law as it stands

and one a lot of us wont want changed to try and erode our parental authority in law even further

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Thank you, Gary, for trying to help in your own inimitable way (you're so special).

However, there are no references in the Schools Department, on David Laws or the Lib Dems websites (or, as previously stated, if you search the internet using those parameters) for supporting evidence that this stuff actually happened, and I can't find any info about this so-called campaign (but willing to be pointed in the right direction if anyone else can find it)>

Just because the Daily Mail says so, doesn't mean it actually happened.;)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

David Laws seems to be unaware that he's "spearheading" this particular campaign.

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

maybe someone should tell him ;)

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Westland helicopters? :erm:

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

Does this loophole mean my children will get smacked all day Monday and Tuesday mornings but not during the rest of the week? :dunce:

Re: Smacking ban in schools loophole
 

No.