USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
- Thread starter Ralph Baer
- Start date
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
Thank god for us both that technology doesnt give me the ability to reach thru my screen right now. I cant believe that you wrote / believe this. Then again, with you I can. Up for most insensitive post of the year.
Thank god for us both that technology doesnt give me the ability to reach thru my screen right now. I cant believe that you wrote / believe this. Then again, with you I can. Up for most insensitive post of the year.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
Typical out of context response. Read the rest of the post.
Typical out of context response. Read the rest of the post.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
That was an entire clause of a sentence. Are you saying that because you are willing the basic latitude of "some autism is legitimate," that makes "we can beat it out of some of them" somehow acceptable?
Good Lord.
That was an entire clause of a sentence. Are you saying that because you are willing the basic latitude of "some autism is legitimate," that makes "we can beat it out of some of them" somehow acceptable?
Good Lord.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
I guess you missed the point. There are some people who are correctly diagnosed with this disease, and some people who are incorrectly diagnosed. We've seen this quite a bit with autism, ADD, ADHD, and several other diseases and disorders out there. For those that truly have autism and were correctly diagnosed, they truly need assistance, and is exactly why events such as this are taking place. There has NEVER been any waiver from that point whatsoever. I am worried that those who were misdiagnosed as autistic are stealing money from these foundations just because a corrupt pharmaceutical wanted to push some drugs onto more people. THAT is the basis behind the comment.
I guess you missed the point. There are some people who are correctly diagnosed with this disease, and some people who are incorrectly diagnosed. We've seen this quite a bit with autism, ADD, ADHD, and several other diseases and disorders out there. For those that truly have autism and were correctly diagnosed, they truly need assistance, and is exactly why events such as this are taking place. There has NEVER been any waiver from that point whatsoever. I am worried that those who were misdiagnosed as autistic are stealing money from these foundations just because a corrupt pharmaceutical wanted to push some drugs onto more people. THAT is the basis behind the comment.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
And those ones, we can just beat them?
Or am I just missing the point of "could be cured by a simple belt to the bottom?"
Regardless, even if you're that seriously misguided, there was no reason at all to bring this up.
And those ones, we can just beat them?
Or am I just missing the point of "could be cured by a simple belt to the bottom?"
Regardless, even if you're that seriously misguided, there was no reason at all to bring this up.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
No one "missed the point," Dude. You are not a parent, obviously, and so can be flippant and irresponsible in your ill-considered and thoughtless remarks. however, for those of us who actually do have the responsibility of molding another person's life, using physical violence against a helpless child merely because you are frustrated with that child's behavior is a terrible example and speaks solely to your own frustration and does nothing whatsoever to help the child.
Do you want people to learn that it is okay to lash out at others when you are frustrated? or is it better to take a breath, center yourself, and start again without resorting to violence?
Spare me please the stories about how your parents used to beat you and you turned out okay because obviously others might disagree with your self-assessment. Yes, plenty of us had corporal punishment growing up and my own memories of it were that I won, I got Dad to lose it while I kept my cool.
No one "missed the point," Dude. You are not a parent, obviously, and so can be flippant and irresponsible in your ill-considered and thoughtless remarks. however, for those of us who actually do have the responsibility of molding another person's life, using physical violence against a helpless child merely because you are frustrated with that child's behavior is a terrible example and speaks solely to your own frustration and does nothing whatsoever to help the child.
Do you want people to learn that it is okay to lash out at others when you are frustrated? or is it better to take a breath, center yourself, and start again without resorting to violence?
Spare me please the stories about how your parents used to beat you and you turned out okay because obviously others might disagree with your self-assessment. Yes, plenty of us had corporal punishment growing up and my own memories of it were that I won, I got Dad to lose it while I kept my cool.
Last edited:
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
Capital punishment has been 100% effective in preventing murderers from killing again.
Capital punishment has been 100% effective in preventing murderers from killing again.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
All very sensible-how do you suppose a parent should react to truly bad behavior on the part of their child? And should that reaction be proportionate in its response to just how bad that act is? Just curious as a parent myself and also a former psychiatry resident. (I know-not really hockey related but just passing some time today before all the excitement of this weekend)
All very sensible-how do you suppose a parent should react to truly bad behavior on the part of their child? And should that reaction be proportionate in its response to just how bad that act is? Just curious as a parent myself and also a former psychiatry resident. (I know-not really hockey related but just passing some time today before all the excitement of this weekend)
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
I cannot even begin to suggest how someone else "should" react without more context. So much depends upon how consistently you have behaved toward the child from his/her infancy, and whatever medical / psychiatric conditions may be present. We've been very lucky not to have had problem children in those areas at least.
Generally, making sure that the children go through the "natural consequences" of bad behavior without sheltering them from it has been sufficient for us. Too many other parents allow bad behavior to compound by ignoring or overlooking it until it gets unmanageable. My best "answer" would be to start really young. We even had a family joke about it: "Mothers-in-law don't want to see their grandchildren fall down; fathers don't want to see their children get hurt too badly when they fall down." If they fall down, they should get hurt, a little, that helps them learn balance. Some parents try to shelter their children completely from all pain and suffering and it seems to me that it is mostly those children who become problems when they get older.
let me give you an example or two from my own experiences. We have been very consistent with our expectations of our children from their infancy (obviously adjusting the expectations as the children mature).
> One time, with my son, when he was young and did something he wasn't supposed to do, I said to him very calmly, "[Name], I'm very disappointed in you." He immediately burst into tears. At that age, his father's approval was very important to him, and keeping that approval was a powerful motivator.
> Once, when she was about three or four, our daughter lied. It was an obvious lie to avoid "getting into trouble." We merely disbelieved everything she told us for about a month. She was absolutely miserable by the end of that month. No lecture, merely a "natural consequence." As far as we know, she has never lied to us since.
> there are also the typical "being grounded" or withdrawing use of something they enjoy.
> from time to time in his later teen years, our son has had to work off financial consequences of irresponsible behavior in order to continue to receive our financial support beyond food and shelter.
I know this doesn't answer your question. Depending on the situation, age, and etc., I might suggest civil commitment if the problem is that extreme.
I cannot even begin to suggest how someone else "should" react without more context. So much depends upon how consistently you have behaved toward the child from his/her infancy, and whatever medical / psychiatric conditions may be present. We've been very lucky not to have had problem children in those areas at least.
Generally, making sure that the children go through the "natural consequences" of bad behavior without sheltering them from it has been sufficient for us. Too many other parents allow bad behavior to compound by ignoring or overlooking it until it gets unmanageable. My best "answer" would be to start really young. We even had a family joke about it: "Mothers-in-law don't want to see their grandchildren fall down; fathers don't want to see their children get hurt too badly when they fall down." If they fall down, they should get hurt, a little, that helps them learn balance. Some parents try to shelter their children completely from all pain and suffering and it seems to me that it is mostly those children who become problems when they get older.
let me give you an example or two from my own experiences. We have been very consistent with our expectations of our children from their infancy (obviously adjusting the expectations as the children mature).
> One time, with my son, when he was young and did something he wasn't supposed to do, I said to him very calmly, "[Name], I'm very disappointed in you." He immediately burst into tears. At that age, his father's approval was very important to him, and keeping that approval was a powerful motivator.
> Once, when she was about three or four, our daughter lied. It was an obvious lie to avoid "getting into trouble." We merely disbelieved everything she told us for about a month. She was absolutely miserable by the end of that month. No lecture, merely a "natural consequence." As far as we know, she has never lied to us since.
> there are also the typical "being grounded" or withdrawing use of something they enjoy.
> from time to time in his later teen years, our son has had to work off financial consequences of irresponsible behavior in order to continue to receive our financial support beyond food and shelter.
I know this doesn't answer your question. Depending on the situation, age, and etc., I might suggest civil commitment if the problem is that extreme.
Last edited:
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
FF: You at least give this a lot of thought-and I commend you for it. Unfortunately-the population at large for the most part does not. It is all black and white to them-either hitting or absolutely no hitting. As you point out this is not at all simple. The effects of positive and negative reinforcement have been documented over many years-and still not many people can agree. As you have said-and I agree totally-every case and probably every instance has to be individualized.
FF: You at least give this a lot of thought-and I commend you for it. Unfortunately-the population at large for the most part does not. It is all black and white to them-either hitting or absolutely no hitting. As you point out this is not at all simple. The effects of positive and negative reinforcement have been documented over many years-and still not many people can agree. As you have said-and I agree totally-every case and probably every instance has to be individualized.
sk8tronthepond
Registered User
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
Good Lord.....the last I checked, this was a hockey game/series thread......maybe we should take this to the Oprah blog.......I think it's Parenting 101.
Good Lord.....the last I checked, this was a hockey game/series thread......maybe we should take this to the Oprah blog.......I think it's Parenting 101.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
right, and Dr. D and I are merely standing in line at the concession stand chatting about this and that while we wait for the game to begin...
right, and Dr. D and I are merely standing in line at the concession stand chatting about this and that while we wait for the game to begin...
sk8tronthepond
Registered User
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
....it's obviously not the line at HFH, your chatting would have ended long ago!!
right, and Dr. D and I are merely standing in line at the concession stand chatting about this and that while we wait for the game to begin...
....it's obviously not the line at HFH, your chatting would have ended long ago!!
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
Policeman in Phoenix out here tased his step son for getting a bad report card. I think that is bad. He got fired.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
A woman killed her child for failure to memorise the Quran.
A woman killed her child for failure to memorise the Quran.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
It always puzzles me a bit that we require people to reach a minimum age and get specialized training and pass a licensing exam before we give them the legal right to drive a motor vehicle. We require people to pass a background check before they are allowed to purchase a rifle for hunting. Yet we allow any twit with an ovary to raise a child without any limitation at all??
very gnarly. it used to be society put limits on such behavior through shaming and family support systems (e.g., grandparents raise children of teen mothers). That has disintegrated and nothing has yet taken its place.
It always puzzles me a bit that we require people to reach a minimum age and get specialized training and pass a licensing exam before we give them the legal right to drive a motor vehicle. We require people to pass a background check before they are allowed to purchase a rifle for hunting. Yet we allow any twit with an ovary to raise a child without any limitation at all??
very gnarly. it used to be society put limits on such behavior through shaming and family support systems (e.g., grandparents raise children of teen mothers). That has disintegrated and nothing has yet taken its place.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
My dad never raised a hand to his children. However, he could make one small statement or a look and you felt overwhelmed with guilt. Worked like a charm with me. But you have it right-you need a license to do just about anything else in this country except have a child.
Now back to hockey this weekend-tonight NBC sports is showing Princeton at Massachusetts at 7PM. I suppose all these college broadcasts may disappear after this weekend as the NHL gets restarted. I missed the NHL but sure hope we still get these various NCAA games on TV.
It always puzzles me a bit that we require people to reach a minimum age and get specialized training and pass a licensing exam before we give them the legal right to drive a motor vehicle. We require people to pass a background check before they are allowed to purchase a rifle for hunting. Yet we allow any twit with an ovary to raise a child without any limitation at all??
very gnarly. it used to be society put limits on such behavior through shaming and family support systems (e.g., grandparents raise children of teen mothers). That has disintegrated and nothing has yet taken its place.
My dad never raised a hand to his children. However, he could make one small statement or a look and you felt overwhelmed with guilt. Worked like a charm with me. But you have it right-you need a license to do just about anything else in this country except have a child.
Now back to hockey this weekend-tonight NBC sports is showing Princeton at Massachusetts at 7PM. I suppose all these college broadcasts may disappear after this weekend as the NHL gets restarted. I missed the NHL but sure hope we still get these various NCAA games on TV.
Re: Colgate & Cornell @ RPI & Union (1/18, 1/19)
Providence (not PU) vs UMass-Lowell