Peterson charged with reckless or negligent injury to a child? (1 Viewer)

[chinawildman]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx

Even better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Neofight]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

My friend, in case you have not noticed, this is America.P.S. Your constant proclamations of surprise and befuddlement through what has apparently now become soliloquy is some of the best drama in this forum, let alone the thread.

Of course. More generalizations and false consensus bias. I would expect nothing less. Well done, I'm sure 100% of all Americans agree.

Hehe, you missed that one.Who is righteous now?

 

[General Tso]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspxEven better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Morals get imposed on others for many reasons, two of which are both vey reasonable and very applicable in his case:1. When the actions negatively impact an innocent child who can't speak for himself.

2. When the actions negatively affect society at large when the child grows up and takes out his aggressions and learning on others.

I could give two flying ####s what two consenting adults do, even if it goes against my morals. But that's not at all what we have here. Hurt people hurt people.

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

 

[chinawildman]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

My friend, in case you have not noticed, this is America.P.S. Your constant proclamations of surprise and befuddlement through what has apparently now become soliloquy is some of the best drama in this forum, let alone the thread.

Of course. More generalizations and false consensus bias. I would expect nothing less. Well done, I'm sure 100% of all Americans agree.

Hehe, you missed that one.Who is righteous now?

Haha you know what, before that cliche simpleton response of "this is America", I actually took you for a more clever person. But yea you've proven me wrong. Happy?

 

[Neofight]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

My friend, in case you have not noticed, this is America.P.S. Your constant proclamations of surprise and befuddlement through what has apparently now become soliloquy is some of the best drama in this forum, let alone the thread.

Of course. More generalizations and false consensus bias. I would expect nothing less. Well done, I'm sure 100% of all Americans agree.

Hehe, you missed that one.Who is righteous now?

Haha you know what, before that cliche simpleton response of "this is America", I actually took you for a more clever person. But yea you've proven me wrong. Happy?

I should be disappointed?

 

[chinawildman]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspxEven better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Morals get imposed on others for many reasons, two of which are both vey reasonable and very applicable in his case:1. When the actions negatively impact an innocent child who can't speak for himself.

2. When the actions negatively affect society at large when the child grows up and takes out his aggressions and learning on others.

I could give two flying ####s what two consenting adults do, even if it goes against my morals. But that's not at all what we have here. Hurt people hurt people.

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

You seem reasonably intelligent as well, so I assume that you understand reading one abstract that happens to support your PoV doesn't make it gospel. People like to read stuff that agrees with what they feel all the time. We seek it out, be it FF or child discipline. There are plenty of smart people in this world that don't agree with each other.

Fortunately we as human beings aren't sheep. Allowing for variance in disserations and theses written for a plethora of competing theories. The realm of parenting encompasses so many environments and situations that it's unlikely for one particular style of parenting to be universally successful in all cases.

The fact that I read the same article you did with a more critical eye and skepticism doesn't make me stupid, I simply disagree. Hopefully you can accept that.

 

[whiskey7]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspxEven better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Morals get imposed on others for many reasons, two of which are both vey reasonable and very applicable in his case:1. When the actions negatively impact an innocent child who can't speak for himself.

2. When the actions negatively affect society at large when the child grows up and takes out his aggressions and learning on others.

I could give two flying ####s what two consenting adults do, even if it goes against my morals. But that's not at all what we have here. Hurt people hurt people.

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

You seem reasonably intelligent as well, so I assume that you understand reading one abstract that happens to support your PoV doesn't make it gospel. People like to read stuff that agrees with what they feel all the time. We seek it out, be it FF or child discipline. There are plenty of smart people in this world that don't agree with each other.

Fortunately we as human beings aren't sheep. Allowing for variance in disserations and theses written for a plethora of competing theories. The realm of parenting encompasses so many environments and situations that it's unlikely for one particular style of parenting to be universally successful in all cases.

The fact that I read the same article you did with a more critical eye and skepticism doesn't make me stupid, I simply disagree. Hopefully you can accept that.

Oh, I think you're underestimating a great deal of the population.

 

[Niaboc]

This thread is getting a little ridiculous here. Lets just wait for the ruling on what happens and not debate over who has better morals and child raising abilities then the other person. This is Fantasy Football not peoples court, lets keep it about football.

 

[ghostguy123]

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

What EXACTLY does science show doesnt work?? I mean, EXACTLY what?

 

[fourd]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

Disciplining children is not like cut and dry like other crimes such as robbery or murder, which are fairly black and white.The use of physical punishment as a disciplining technique and it's acceptance, level of frequency/techniques... Is something that varies greatly from culture to culture, and even in most American cultures, has evolved and changed over time.

I think it's fair for folks to caveat their opinions/analysis as being prevalent to the times we live in now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel if we were living 50 years in 1964, there's a high probability this incident has far less consequences, if any.

I'm not saying that is right, but it's the way things are and how they've changed over time. Does a kid get expelled from school if his mom accidentally left a butter knife in his backpack in 1964. People are just framing the issue relative to the current social norms and expectations.

That's not really what I was trying to say. My problem was with the tone and absolutism with which these statements are delivered. Why is personal opinion eschewed in favor of more dramatic broad sweeping general statements about "society"?

All we have are our own experiences, and thus our opinions are likely strongly biased based on those experiences. Yet the way people are delivering their opinions you'd think they're writing the rulebook on child abuse for EVERYBODY.

They have a rulebook in Texas and it's called the penal code. And the prosecutor believes Peterson violated a part of it. No one on this board brought the charges. And I don't see any difference in those giving their opinions than you giving yours.

No one anywhere has brought charges yet.

Really?

Yes, really.

I suspect next week, but obviously no one knows.

Was he indicted or not?

 

[fourd]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

Disciplining children is not like cut and dry like other crimes such as robbery or murder, which are fairly black and white.The use of physical punishment as a disciplining technique and it's acceptance, level of frequency/techniques... Is something that varies greatly from culture to culture, and even in most American cultures, has evolved and changed over time.

I think it's fair for folks to caveat their opinions/analysis as being prevalent to the times we live in now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel if we were living 50 years in 1964, there's a high probability this incident has far less consequences, if any.

I'm not saying that is right, but it's the way things are and how they've changed over time. Does a kid get expelled from school if his mom accidentally left a butter knife in his backpack in 1964. People are just framing the issue relative to the current social norms and expectations.

That's not really what I was trying to say. My problem was with the tone and absolutism with which these statements are delivered. Why is personal opinion eschewed in favor of more dramatic broad sweeping general statements about "society"?

All we have are our own experiences, and thus our opinions are likely strongly biased based on those experiences. Yet the way people are delivering their opinions you'd think they're writing the rulebook on child abuse for EVERYBODY.

They have a rulebook in Texas and it's called the penal code. And the prosecutor believes Peterson violated a part of it. No one on this board brought the charges. And I don't see any difference in those giving their opinions than you giving yours.

Did you actually read my post? Can you tell the difference between:

1) I like Wendy's hamburgers

and

2) Wendy's hamburgers are the best. You haven't had a real burger until you've had a Wendy's hamburger.

Way too much of #2 in this thread. It's like people think they're the Skip Bayless of morality.

Yes, and if you are that upset over someone using the second sentence then don't buy a Wendy's hamburger. You are free to disagree. Much like I can say I disagree with your opinion that there's way too much of #2. Seems like you are doing the same thing you are accusing others of in here.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Adrian Beathisson

Where is that Tom guy to start a petition to get AP's name officially changed for this season?

 

[shoecrew22]

Is the league going to act before his trial/conviction?

Doesnt the league usually wait for actual legal proceedings?

 

[Gargoylez]

Is the league going to act before his trial/conviction?

Doesnt the league usually wait for actual legal proceedings?

Not sure how they will handle this since its a bit beyond a simple arrest. The overflow of media, the outrage and the previous debacle... letting him play with everyone knowing he beat and abused his 4 year old? That would be one hell of a slippery slope.

 

[AgentMulder]

Kid probably deserved it. Parents spoil kids nowadays it's disgusting.

 

[Neofight]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

Disciplining children is not like cut and dry like other crimes such as robbery or murder, which are fairly black and white.The use of physical punishment as a disciplining technique and it's acceptance, level of frequency/techniques... Is something that varies greatly from culture to culture, and even in most American cultures, has evolved and changed over time.

I think it's fair for folks to caveat their opinions/analysis as being prevalent to the times we live in now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel if we were living 50 years in 1964, there's a high probability this incident has far less consequences, if any.

I'm not saying that is right, but it's the way things are and how they've changed over time. Does a kid get expelled from school if his mom accidentally left a butter knife in his backpack in 1964. People are just framing the issue relative to the current social norms and expectations.

That's not really what I was trying to say. My problem was with the tone and absolutism with which these statements are delivered. Why is personal opinion eschewed in favor of more dramatic broad sweeping general statements about "society"?

All we have are our own experiences, and thus our opinions are likely strongly biased based on those experiences. Yet the way people are delivering their opinions you'd think they're writing the rulebook on child abuse for EVERYBODY.

They have a rulebook in Texas and it's called the penal code. And the prosecutor believes Peterson violated a part of it. No one on this board brought the charges. And I don't see any difference in those giving their opinions than you giving yours.

Did you actually read my post? Can you tell the difference between:

1) I like Wendy's hamburgers

and

2) Wendy's hamburgers are the best. You haven't had a real burger until you've had a Wendy's hamburger.

Way too much of #2 in this thread. It's like people think they're the Skip Bayless of morality.

Yes, and if you are that upset over someone using the second sentence then don't buy a Wendy's hamburger. You are free to disagree. Much like I can say I disagree with your opinion that there's way too much of #2. Seems like you are doing the same thing you are accusing others of in here.

Agreed.It is interesting that the guy complaining the loudest and in the most condescending manner is the same guy handing out Skip Bayless awards.

 

[qimqam]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

Disciplining children is not like cut and dry like other crimes such as robbery or murder, which are fairly black and white.The use of physical punishment as a disciplining technique and it's acceptance, level of frequency/techniques... Is something that varies greatly from culture to culture, and even in most American cultures, has evolved and changed over time.

I think it's fair for folks to caveat their opinions/analysis as being prevalent to the times we live in now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel if we were living 50 years in 1964, there's a high probability this incident has far less consequences, if any.

I'm not saying that is right, but it's the way things are and how they've changed over time. Does a kid get expelled from school if his mom accidentally left a butter knife in his backpack in 1964. People are just framing the issue relative to the current social norms and expectations.

That's not really what I was trying to say. My problem was with the tone and absolutism with which these statements are delivered. Why is personal opinion eschewed in favor of more dramatic broad sweeping general statements about "society"?

All we have are our own experiences, and thus our opinions are likely strongly biased based on those experiences. Yet the way people are delivering their opinions you'd think they're writing the rulebook on child abuse for EVERYBODY.

They have a rulebook in Texas and it's called the penal code. And the prosecutor believes Peterson violated a part of it. No one on this board brought the charges. And I don't see any difference in those giving their opinions than you giving yours.

No one anywhere has brought charges yet.

Really?

Yes, really.

I suspect next week, but obviously no one knows.

Was he indicted or not?

Yes he was indicted which means that the grand jury believes there is enough evidence to charge the accused party with the crime

Here's what happens next

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-happens-after-a-grand-jury-indictment.htm

 

[fatness]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

It's Texas. They look it up in their gut. They don't need some egghead scientists, who probably never even were beaten by their parents, telling them what the evidence supports.

Hey, look. It's Little Bill from "Unforgiven".

 

[fatness]

A proud proclamation that cowards that beat children should never see the football field again! And yet it also has the unfortunate effect of trampling the 5th amendment and due process rights of the accused.

The 5th amendment doesn't protect you from public disgrace, nor does it protect you from losing your job. People seem to keep conflating the possible legal ramifications with the other possible repercussions. No one's saying he should go to prison without having his day in court. But whether a Texas jury finds him guilty is very different than what the NFL has to consider.

Yes that is exactly my point. That in the internet age, due process can no longer protect someone from public defamation due to the speed at which information travels IS a problem.

Public criticism isn't "defamation". It's criticism. There's no need to insulate public figures from criticism.

 

[fourd]

On another note what is with the degree to which people like to announce their disapproval? Why do we keep seeing broad sweeping declarations of righteousness like: "This behavior is not acceptable in any modern society" vs. more realistic and relevant statements like "I don't agree with what AP did"?

It's the same issue I have with reviews on Yelp that proclaim "Best burger in town!"... Really? You went to every single burger joint in town and this was the best? What's with all the self-important declarations? Nobody cares about what your ideas of ideal social norms are, so why get all dramatic about it?

Disciplining children is not like cut and dry like other crimes such as robbery or murder, which are fairly black and white.The use of physical punishment as a disciplining technique and it's acceptance, level of frequency/techniques... Is something that varies greatly from culture to culture, and even in most American cultures, has evolved and changed over time.

I think it's fair for folks to caveat their opinions/analysis as being prevalent to the times we live in now. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel if we were living 50 years in 1964, there's a high probability this incident has far less consequences, if any.

I'm not saying that is right, but it's the way things are and how they've changed over time. Does a kid get expelled from school if his mom accidentally left a butter knife in his backpack in 1964. People are just framing the issue relative to the current social norms and expectations.

That's not really what I was trying to say. My problem was with the tone and absolutism with which these statements are delivered. Why is personal opinion eschewed in favor of more dramatic broad sweeping general statements about "society"?

All we have are our own experiences, and thus our opinions are likely strongly biased based on those experiences. Yet the way people are delivering their opinions you'd think they're writing the rulebook on child abuse for EVERYBODY.

They have a rulebook in Texas and it's called the penal code. And the prosecutor believes Peterson violated a part of it. No one on this board brought the charges. And I don't see any difference in those giving their opinions than you giving yours.

No one anywhere has brought charges yet.

Really?

Yes, really.

I suspect next week, but obviously no one knows.

Was he indicted or not?

Yes he was indicted which means that the grand jury believes there is enough evidence to charge the accused party with the crime

Here's what happens next

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-happens-after-a-grand-jury-indictment.htm

The prosecutor brought the charge to the grand jury, correct? And they agreed there was sufficient evidence to proceed.

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2014/09/13/adrian-peterson-charged-in-child-abuse-case/

 

[fatness]

From what I've seen thusfar, I personally do not condone what Peterson has done. But we are far from learning all the facts in this case.

I don't think there are too many more facts to hear. We already know what the kid said, for example.

According to police reports, the child, however, had a slightly different story, telling authorities that "Daddy Peterson hit me on my face." The child also expressed worry that Peterson would punch him in the face if the child reported the incident to authorities. He also said that he had been hit by a belt and that "there are a lot of belts in Daddy's closet." He added that Peterson put leaves in his mouth when he was being hit with the switch while his pants were down. The child told his mother that Peterson "likes belts and switches" and "has a whooping room."

http://www.dailynorseman.com/2014/9/12/6142533/the-vikings-should-release-adrian-peterson

 

[mbuehner]

There is a famous truism that a prosecutor csn get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwhich. Remember there is no defense council in the room

Not making a judgement on this case, just a general point.

 

[Run It Up]

Sunday morning, I can't help but feel like talking about beating kids.

I'm hoping this sparks a campaign through the nation on what ways are appropriate for disciplining a child.

 

[chinawildman]

Yes that is exactly my point. That in the internet age, due process can no longer protect someone from public defamation due to the speed at which information travels IS a problem.

Public criticism isn't "defamation". It's criticism. There's no need to insulate public figures from criticism.

I don't think there are too many more facts to hear. We already know what the kid said, for example.

These are different days in which we live in. I would like to preface this by saying that I personally feel Peterson IS responsible for the marks on the child, and that what I'm to talk about is mostly a policy argument.

Journalism as it exists now consists of tweets and the blogosphere, amateur journalists who rush to be first on the scene. The veracity of the information seems secondary to its "juiciness". Irresponsible journalism combined with the viral nature of the internet means that inaccurate or false information is often consumed and accepted as truths within hours. Journalistic responsibility is nowhere near what it was 20 years ago, and compounding this, inaccurate or misinformation also spreads like wildfire.

Our measuring stick for validity is often the number of outlets which publish the information. The more egregious or shocking the info, the faster it goes viral, and consequently the more "true" it feels. This perpetuates a cycle where the extremity of the publicized information has a direct effect on its perceived veracity. This would not be such a problem if every human being could consume information with some measure of critical analysis. Unfortunately that is not the case and some people simply believe what we want to believe.

Suppose for a second that during the discovery process of legal proceedings we find out that the leaked photos in the Peterson case turn out to be photos of another child, or that they were taken after the child was horseplaying with a sibling (yes, obviously this is a stretch and merely hypothetical). Will people be on this forum absolving Peterson with the same fervor which we use to crucify him? Highly doubtful, and there will likely remain a contingent of people who will continue to think that Peterson is a child abuser. (See how many people still believe that Obama is a Muslim) We enjoy watching our heroes fail, and we also love to be right.

It is doubtful that libel or slander laws will change anytime soon to address defamation as a result of irresponsible journalism. As such I personally believe in, as well as advocate, responsible consumption. Again this is all just a diatribe based on what I believe to be principle, and likely has little bearing on AP's fate.

 

[Proust Loves Cake]

Sunday morning, I can't help but feel like talking about beating kids.

I'm hoping this sparks a campaign through the nation on what ways are appropriate for disciplining a child.

Exactly. I actually have a lot of hope that this terrible, ugly week is what sparks a wake up call. Child abuse may ultimately follow the same path as slavery, where it was once acceptable and even commonplace, ultimately was abolished by penalty of law and evolving moral principle.

 

[ang12]

Yes that is exactly my point. That in the internet age, due process can no longer protect someone from public defamation due to the speed at which information travels IS a problem.

Public criticism isn't "defamation". It's criticism. There's no need to insulate public figures from criticism.

I don't think there are too many more facts to hear. We already know what the kid said, for example.

These are different days in which we live in. I would like to preface this by saying that I personally feel Peterson IS responsible for the marks on the child, and that what I'm to talk about is mostly a policy argument.

Journalism as it exists now consists of tweets and the blogosphere, amateur journalists who rush to be first on the scene. The veracity of the information seems secondary to its "juiciness". Irresponsible journalism combined with the viral nature of the internet means that inaccurate or false information is often consumed and accepted as truths within hours. Journalistic responsibility is nowhere near what it was 20 years ago, and compounding this, inaccurate or misinformation also spreads like wildfire.

Our measuring stick for validity is often the number of outlets which publish the information. The more egregious or shocking the info, the faster it goes viral, and consequently the more "true" it feels. This perpetuates a cycle where the extremity of the publicized information has a direct effect on its perceived veracity. This would not be such a problem if every human being could consume information with some measure of critical analysis. Unfortunately that is not the case and some people simply believe what we want to believe.

Suppose for a second that during the discovery process of legal proceedings we find out that the leaked photos in the Peterson case turn out to be photos of another child, or that they were taken after the child was horseplaying with a sibling (yes, obviously this is a stretch and merely hypothetical). Will people be on this forum absolving Peterson with the same fervor which we use to crucify him? Highly doubtful, and there will likely remain a contingent of people who will continue to think that Peterson is a child abuser. (See how many people still believe that Obama is a Muslim) We enjoy watching our heroes fail, and we also love to be right.

It is doubtful that libel or slander laws will change anytime soon to address defamation as a result of irresponsible journalism. As such I personally believe in, as well as advocate, responsible consumption. Again this is all just a diatribe based on what I believe to be principle, and likely has little bearing on AP's fate.

A lot of fair points worth discussing, but trying to tie them to such an obvious case of child abuse isn't helping you get your point across.

 

[Vector]

All this..... makes me sad. This is how I feel and how I think they feel.

 

[chinawildman]

Dunno about you guys but I'm ready to stop thinking about this and watch some football.

 

[dparker713]

Peterson is going down for 6, folks, but probably not until next year.

What he's charged with is a state jail felony which carries a 6 month minimum sentence (up to two years). He could try to beat the charge but there's too much risk and will need to plea down to domestic assault - a misdemeanor that carries no mandatory jail time - and get off with probation.

If he takes that plea then he's certain to get a 6 game suspension under the new domestic violence policy.

SInce when does it matter what happens with the courts? Rice got the equivalent of no punishment from the courts and he is out indefinitely.

Rice not only committed a crime of which there's no reasonable excuse but he lied about it and most importantly there was video. Remember he got only 2 games before the video went public.

WHich was stupid. He got punished more for lying than for the act itself. Dumb.

But still................there is no legal action taken against him, and he is out.

What happened to "first offense is 6 games"?????? He isnt even in legal trouble and he is out for a long long time it seems.

I doesn't really matter what the NFL did to Rice and what they will do to Peterson.

Rice was released by the Ravens before the NFL suspended him because they don't want a women beater representing their team and no other team is going to want to deal with him.

Peterson is probably going to get the same treatment for being a child beater.

Really?

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2014/09/terrell_suggs_domestic_violence_like_his_teammate_ray_rice_the_ravens_linebacker.html

 

[dparker713]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspxEven better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Morals get imposed on others for many reasons, two of which are both vey reasonable and very applicable in his case:1. When the actions negatively impact an innocent child who can't speak for himself.

2. When the actions negatively affect society at large when the child grows up and takes out his aggressions and learning on others.

I could give two flying ####s what two consenting adults do, even if it goes against my morals. But that's not at all what we have here. Hurt people hurt people.

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

The science is ####ty at best.

 

[General Tso]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspxEven better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Morals get imposed on others for many reasons, two of which are both vey reasonable and very applicable in his case:1. When the actions negatively impact an innocent child who can't speak for himself.

2. When the actions negatively affect society at large when the child grows up and takes out his aggressions and learning on others.

I could give two flying ####s what two consenting adults do, even if it goes against my morals. But that's not at all what we have here. Hurt people hurt people.

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

The science is ####ty at best.

There's been a fair a out of research done over the years. The fact that most of it supports the notion that corporal punishment often has harmful long term consequences does not mean the research is shifty.I'm very open minded on this issue. I would love to see real scientific evidence supporting the use of corporal punishment. Thus far I haven't seen any. You'd think if someone were going to embrace the philosophy of hitting a child they'd want to be absolutely sure that there is actual evidence out there that it works and doesn't have any negative long term consequences.

 

[dparker713]

Controlling a kid with pain, fear, and humiliation is not "discipline". There's no evidence supporting it as a successful long term technique while there's plenty of studies stating that even just spanking can lead to anti-social behavior, aggression, etc. It's cowardly and barbaric.

Seems like a lot of people in here support corporal punishment. You might want to check this out. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspxEven better, feel free to do your own research on it. I haven't found any good material out there showing it's effectiveness from a long term standpoint. If someone could find such a study, please post it. I'd love to read it (seriously).

I think a lot of people in this support the freedom for parents to choose their method of discipline within legal means.

I think a lot of people don't like people that impose their own moral values onto others.

I also think a lot of these same people find AP's actions reprehensible.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Morals get imposed on others for many reasons, two of which are both vey reasonable and very applicable in his case:1. When the actions negatively impact an innocent child who can't speak for himself.

2. When the actions negatively affect society at large when the child grows up and takes out his aggressions and learning on others.

I could give two flying ####s what two consenting adults do, even if it goes against my morals. But that's not at all what we have here. Hurt people hurt people.

And besides all of that - science shows that it doesn't work and causes negative long term consequences. You seem reasonably intelligent. I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't get this.

The science is ####ty at best.

There's been a fair a out of research done over the years. The fact that most of it supports the notion that corporal punishment often has harmful long term consequences does not mean the research is shifty.I'm very open minded on this issue. I would love to see real scientific evidence supporting the use of corporal punishment. Thus far I haven't seen any. You'd think if someone were going to embrace the philosophy of hitting a child they'd want to be absolutely sure that there is actual evidence out there that it works and doesn't have any negative long term consequences.

Researchers can't gain access to punishment as it occurs nor can they adequately recreate the conditions. So yes, its ####ty.

 

[Lash]

I work with victims of child abuse

this is not child abuse

I would give anything if the LEAST ABUSED of the thirteen children I work with could convert their abuse to being "whooped" ten times as bad as Peterson did this child

There is a loss of perspective here, amplified tenfold by the Ray Rice timing

only benefit i see is so ADP gets scared enough (which has already happened I'd imagine ) to not eventually reach that level of abuse.

 

[General Tso]

I work with victims of child abuse

this is not child abuse

I would give anything if the LEAST ABUSED of the thirteen children I work with could convert their abuse to being "whooped" ten times as bad as Peterson did this child

There is a loss of perspective here, amplified tenfold by the Ray Rice timing

only benefit i see is so ADP gets scared enough to not eventually reach that level of abuse, which has already happened I'd imagine

Ironic user name.

 

[Neofight]

I work with victims of child abuse

this is not child abuse

I would give anything if the LEAST ABUSED of the thirteen children I work with could convert their abuse to being "whooped" ten times as bad as Peterson did this child

There is a loss of perspective here, amplified tenfold by the Ray Rice timing

only benefit i see is so ADP gets scared enough to not eventually reach that level of abuse, which has already happened I'd imagine

What capacity do you serve in working with these kids?Your wording is a little confusing: at first you state it's not abuse, then you say a benefit might be that Peterson is sufficiently warned to not "reach that level of abuse". This implies he is indeed on a continuum of abuse.

I understand these things are grey, but the attending physician stated it was abuse and Peterson was indicted. There's a very real perception that those pictures do depict wounds from abuse. Aside from comparisons to children who may have suffered more abuse (which is sad though hardly relevant), what makes you believe the details we do know of this case do not constitute abuse?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I work with victims of child abuse

this is not child abuse

This isn't parenting, this is how stupid, small "men" discipline 4-year old children. Just because other kids have it worse doesn't mean this isn't abuse.

 

[huthut]

So what are the ethics of picking him up in a league? He was dropped and is a free agent. If Ray Rice is done he should probably be done, but never know.

 

[Maelstrom]

So what are the ethics of picking him up in a league? He was dropped and is a free agent. If Ray Rice is done he should probably be done, but never know.

Ethics? If you you think he'll play and you think he'll benefit your team, you pick him up. Let the NFL and Vikings worry about the 'ethics' of the situation.

 

[donkshow]

He's still got value. Was offered McFadden and Marshall for him this morning.

 

[Lash]

I work with victims of child abuse

this is not child abuse

I would give anything if the LEAST ABUSED of the thirteen children I work with could convert their abuse to being "whooped" ten times as bad as Peterson did this child

There is a loss of perspective here, amplified tenfold by the Ray Rice timing

only benefit i see is so ADP gets scared enough to not eventually reach that level of abuse, which has already happened I'd imagine

What capacity do you serve in working with these kids?Your wording is a little confusing: at first you state it's not abuse, then you say a benefit might be that Peterson is sufficiently warned to not "reach that level of abuse". This implies he is indeed on a continuum of abuse.

I understand these things are grey, but the attending physician stated it was abuse and Peterson was indicted. There's a very real perception that those pictures do depict wounds from abuse. Aside from comparisons to children who may have suffered more abuse (which is sad though hardly relevant), what makes you believe the details we do know of this case do not constitute abuse?

I am their teacher, counselor, and whatever else they need to get them back to be able to function in society.

I am saying on a scale of 1-10 in relation to what I've seen, it is not a 1

They actually didn't indict him the first time right? That is why I would say that it is questionable and probably no one would've ever heard of this again until photos were illegally released publicly if I have kept up with the reports right? Which means some overeager DA office person who saw a career could be made releases pictures of a minor who will have to live with this now right? And perfect timing too with the Ray Rice deserved suspension garnering national attention. Does that not make one seem that this is a little political in nature? Or the baby mama may be seeing dollar signs. Maybe I'm cynical.

I am saying that who knows if ADP is capable of getting to the type of anger that constitutes the abuse I see. That is not a crime though as far as I know and the exposure surely has been punitive enough that probation and loss of visitation rights will correct his behavior.

And I in no way mentioned that it was good parenting.

It is just not abuse IMO

LOL at the reference to my forum name, it is my nickname related to my last name, not related on what i might use to "whoop" my children

 

[fatness]

I am saying on a scale of 1-10 in relation to what I've seen, it is not a 1

You see (some of) the worst of the worst. A great deal of abuse isn't seen by you or anyone in any agency. I think you'll agree on that. There's a lot of behavior that's abusive but isn't as terrible as (I'm guessing) the broken bones, concussions, wounds, etc. you see.

At the same time I'm extremely glad you do the work you do to help these kids out. Thank you. Thank you greatly. Kids don't deserve the beatings some adults give them. They're kids.

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

Peterson’s case may pit church against state

Several media outlets, including September 13 article in Fox News; are reporting that Adrian Peterson has been released from jail after posting bond. Peterson, a running back for the NFL’s Minnesota Vikings, is being charged with abusing his child by beating the child with a switch. According to NBC News, the child in question was 4 years old when the incident occurred.

There are 3 million child abuse cases reported each year; according to the website childhelp.org. Almost 80% of all reported cases were for neglect. 30% of abused children went on to be abusers as well. Over 90% of children that are abused know their attacker in some way.

100 parents were asked if they supported Peterson’s use of a switch. 15% of those polled sup-ported the use of a switch. 70% of those polled supported spanking. 10% of those polled felt that the use of a switch or belt was a barbaric and antiquated form of discipline.

On the subject of corporal punishment, the Bible (Proverbs 23:13) says that we should not withhold discipline from a child. The Bible also states (Proverbs 22:15) that the rod of correction will get rid of the foolishness of a child. It is then imperative that parents and disciplinarians know when they have crossed the line and their discipline becomes abuse.

Spanking or whipping a child is one of the emotional and spiritual decisions that have to be made by a parent. Parents must be sure that their actions are in line with the Bible; but also that they do not violate the law of the land. Does spanking or beating a child cross the line? Do you condone spanking a child? Can the lesson you are attempting to teach the child be done through time out or loss of privileges?

 

[RhymesMcJuice]

Peterson calls habitual judgers out with Bible verse on Twitter.

 

[Disco Stu]

Peterson calls habitual judgers out with Bible verse on Twitter.

Maybe he should take ten minutes to read this the next time he feels compelled to judge a child.

 

[Disco Stu]

Do we know how much time Peterson gets with the kids? Taking regular whoopings from someone who isn't your primary caregiver seems pretty awful.

The 4 year old referred to him as "Daddy Peterson", which to me makes it sound like he has a different father figure more often than not.

 

[fatness]

Peterson’s case may pit church against state

Several media outlets, including September 13 article in Fox News; are reporting that Adrian Peterson has been released from jail after posting bond. Peterson, a running back for the NFL’s Minnesota Vikings, is being charged with abusing his child by beating the child with a switch. According to NBC News, the child in question was 4 years old when the incident occurred.

There are 3 million child abuse cases reported each year; according to the website childhelp.org. Almost 80% of all reported cases were for neglect. 30% of abused children went on to be abusers as well. Over 90% of children that are abused know their attacker in some way.

100 parents were asked if they supported Peterson’s use of a switch. 15% of those polled sup-ported the use of a switch. 70% of those polled supported spanking. 10% of those polled felt that the use of a switch or belt was a barbaric and antiquated form of discipline.

On the subject of corporal punishment, the Bible (Proverbs 23:13) says that we should not withhold discipline from a child. The Bible also states (Proverbs 22:15) that the rod of correction will get rid of the foolishness of a child. It is then imperative that parents and disciplinarians know when they have crossed the line and their discipline becomes abuse.

Spanking or whipping a child is one of the emotional and spiritual decisions that have to be made by a parent. Parents must be sure that their actions are in line with the Bible; but also that they do not violate the law of the land. Does spanking or beating a child cross the line? Do you condone spanking a child? Can the lesson you are attempting to teach the child be done through time out or loss of privileges?

That's a pretty terrible article. It doesn't say the "church" is pitted against the "state" in any way. Sounds more like someone at the examiner said "Hey, we need to put up some of our own content on this. You all have the list of the usual talking points. Use some of those."

 

[JetMaxx]

Peterson’s case may pit church against state

Several media outlets, including September 13 article in Fox News; are reporting that Adrian Peterson has been released from jail after posting bond. Peterson, a running back for the NFL’s Minnesota Vikings, is being charged with abusing his child by beating the child with a switch. According to NBC News, the child in question was 4 years old when the incident occurred.

There are 3 million child abuse cases reported each year; according to the website childhelp.org. Almost 80% of all reported cases were for neglect. 30% of abused children went on to be abusers as well. Over 90% of children that are abused know their attacker in some way.

100 parents were asked if they supported Peterson’s use of a switch. 15% of those polled sup-ported the use of a switch. 70% of those polled supported spanking. 10% of those polled felt that the use of a switch or belt was a barbaric and antiquated form of discipline.

On the subject of corporal punishment, the Bible (Proverbs 23:13) says that we should not withhold discipline from a child. The Bible also states (Proverbs 22:15) that the rod of correction will get rid of the foolishness of a child. It is then imperative that parents and disciplinarians know when they have crossed the line and their discipline becomes abuse.

Spanking or whipping a child is one of the emotional and spiritual decisions that have to be made by a parent. Parents must be sure that their actions are in line with the Bible; but also that they do not violate the law of the land. Does spanking or beating a child cross the line? Do you condone spanking a child? Can the lesson you are attempting to teach the child be done through time out or loss of privileges?

That's a pretty terrible article. It doesn't say the "church" is pitted against the "state" in any way. Sounds more like someone at the examiner said "Hey, we need to put up some of our own content on this. You all have the list of the usual talking points. Use some of those."

Media.

 

[(HULK)]

One thing no one has talked about, supposedly the mom who brought the kid to the doc did it for a regular checkup and saw nothing wrong with the switching. And supposedly the kid got switched with an extension cord. And Peterson, who has supposedly been very forthwright thus far, claims he never used an extension cord. Meaning, some of those marks on the kid may be from someone else (the mother?).

Hopefully this gets figured out soon for the kid's sake. If the mom is doing it just as much as Peterson was, that needs to stop too.

 

[Neofight]

One thing no one has talked about, supposedly the mom who brought the kid to the doc did it for a regular checkup and saw nothing wrong with the switching. And supposedly the kid got switched with an extension cord. And Peterson, who has supposedly been very forthwright thus far, claims he never used an extension cord. Meaning, some of those marks on the kid may be from someone else (the mother?).

Hopefully this gets figured out soon for the kid's sake. If the mom is doing it just as much as Peterson was, that needs to stop too.

Do you have a link on the use of an extension cord? I've only seen that police asked Peterson if he used one and he said no, but not that they have physical evidence one was used.

 

[fourd]

I work with victims of child abuse

this is not child abuse

I would give anything if the LEAST ABUSED of the thirteen children I work with could convert their abuse to being "whooped" ten times as bad as Peterson did this child

There is a loss of perspective here, amplified tenfold by the Ray Rice timing

only benefit i see is so ADP gets scared enough to not eventually reach that level of abuse, which has already happened I'd imagine

What capacity do you serve in working with these kids?Your wording is a little confusing: at first you state it's not abuse, then you say a benefit might be that Peterson is sufficiently warned to not "reach that level of abuse". This implies he is indeed on a continuum of abuse.

I understand these things are grey, but the attending physician stated it was abuse and Peterson was indicted. There's a very real perception that those pictures do depict wounds from abuse. Aside from comparisons to children who may have suffered more abuse (which is sad though hardly relevant), what makes you believe the details we do know of this case do not constitute abuse?

I am their teacher, counselor, and whatever else they need to get them back to be able to function in society.

I am saying on a scale of 1-10 in relation to what I've seen, it is not a 1

They actually didn't indict him the first time right? That is why I would say that it is questionable and probably no one would've ever heard of this again until photos were illegally released publicly if I have kept up with the reports right? Which means some overeager DA office person who saw a career could be made releases pictures of a minor who will have to live with this now right? And perfect timing too with the Ray Rice deserved suspension garnering national attention. Does that not make one seem that this is a little political in nature? Or the baby mama may be seeing dollar signs. Maybe I'm cynical.

I am saying that who knows if ADP is capable of getting to the type of anger that constitutes the abuse I see. That is not a crime though as far as I know and the exposure surely has been punitive enough that probation and loss of visitation rights will correct his behavior.

And I in no way mentioned that it was good parenting.

It is just not abuse IMO

LOL at the reference to my forum name, it is my nickname related to my last name, not related on what i might use to "whoop" my children

According to the DA there was only one grand jury -

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/vikings/2014/09/13/adrian-peterson-child-abuse-district-attorney-press-conference/15581419/