Thai Catholic School Teacher Caught Caning Students

[MikeyIdea]

Well, what's your thought on that matter? Do we enforce or fight the violence in those children by imposing more violence on them?

Difficult question. I haven't decided on a final position in this matter. Personally, I won't use any form of corporal punishment on a child ever, so my sympathies lean heavily toward this position. But at the same time I am not convinced that banning corporal punishment is the only correct position to hold.

I concur. Also as a high school student in Australia i was more a young man and less a child so the use of the term " children " may be a little overused and misplaced..

This is a thread about corporal punishment of children so the term children is hardly overused and misplaced

[mmh8]

so....like it or not,

it is Child abuse,

it damages rather than "improves" children,

Those who practice it either have behavioural problems of their own, or are perverts or of one kind or another

Furthermore consider this - if they deal in such a physical manner with a child who has annoyed them what happens at the other end of the scale when they want to show a child affection?????????

.....and those who "think' it "did them no harm" - think again - there have been people on this thread airing some dangerously unbalanced and deeply disturbing views on life experience and child care, not to mention practices on children that are ILLEGAL....both nationally and internationally.

Actually it is you who appears to have the behavioral problem. Your beliefs are predicated on the outright denial that humans are by their very nature violent. This violence gets stamped out by society in most people, but it is there in all of us. It simmers under the surface of political correctness - contained, constrained, repressed, ignored, rejected. It rebels at the strictures of modern society. It is pathological to deny these basic facts.

Kids understand violence as do adults. All humans do, along with the animals. Pain equals bad. Pain equals don't repeat the behavior that brought it about. You claim to know all the answers. You vilify those who do not believe as you do. And yet your answers are only found in the modern psychology and education theory unleashed on the world in the last several decades. The world isn't much better now than it was in the past, only people today deny their natural instincts to an extent unimaginable even to our most recent ancestors.

These theories are also highly self-serving in that they only apply when the overall goal is socialization and forcing people to ignore, deny, and repress their violent nature. So yes, if the goal is to produce an unnatural child in an unnatural environment (which in the end we all must do) then the conclusions of modern psychology are relevant.

No matter what society and psychology tells us, people are still humans. We harbor violent tendencies. We respond to violence and learn from it as well. This is not about a behavioral disorder in any way. It is the natural way that humans have lived for tens of thousands of years, if not hundreds of thousands.

Please understand, I am not in any way condoning the teacher's actions. Those actions are illegal. Laws are a forced agreement imposed upon all members of any society. Laws exist to protect us from the natural inclinations of other people and from our own natural inclinations. For a smooth functioning society laws are necessary. This teacher knew the societal rules and, arguably, violated them. There are consequences for such violations. But this does not mean that the teacher was in any way sick or deranged. He simply utilized the behavior modification methods he learned as a child. He is also quite likely to have witnessed the caning of students by many of his peers, due to the prevalence of corporal punishment in schools here. He probably believed he was doing the right thing.

Funny post waytoomuchcoffee - You claim that another TV poster who has a different opinion of yours is the one having a behaviour problem, yet he has shown no more than you and many others have, only difference of opinion

A few comments to your thinking;

Humans are animals and they are therefore, more or less and don't forget more or less, prone to violence, correct. Killer bees are very aggressive by nature, Labradors are not. No one would deny that an abused Labrador could become violent, if it does, then it can hardly be considered its nature. Or can it? Is that releasing its true nature?

You write from your own perspective and you don't understand that the important question is not if kids understand that violence is bad or not or that pain is bad. What is important for the kid is that the kid is taught what is right, not taught to get used to what is bad = getting bad if you do bad, which double the amount of bad. In short, it is good to bad ratio that is important when shaping children. Child psychatrists have been talking about the need for explaining the correct path, not enforcing the violent and wrong path for many decades now, lost to some it seems. Deliberately lost to a few perhaps. Unprovoced violence is up thousands of % only the last 40 years, why is that? Compared to medieval times, violence is down but please explain if you think that is because of people changing or society changing and enforcing rules. The good to bad ratio that should be used to foster children is an open discussion with only the extremes in both directions being wrong, this discussion is not about that. It should be noted that child psychatrists consider the event of kids watching Ben Ten to foster violence, as does corporal punishment

I find your belief, that modern child psychiatry which is based on the knowledge that kids in fact are formed by their environment, would foster unnatural children appalling and bizarre. No one is questioning that there is violence in everybody, only the correctness of your logical thinking when you seem to believe that intruducing and enforcing it with more violence is not creating a more violent nature, it is instead somehow creating - how did you express it? - unnatural children when you depress it. Laughable

I do understand that you think the teachers actions were (way) out of line. I don't agree with reasoning for why he did it, his perspective is totally irrelevant, only the childs perspective matters, that is his job, if he doesn't like it, change profession

One correction;

I find your belief, that modern child psychiatry which is based on the knowledge that kids in fact are formed by their environment, would foster unnatural children appalling and bizarre. No one is questioning that there is violence in everybody, only the correctness of your logical thinking when you seem to believe that intruducing and enforcing it with more violence is not creating a more violent nature, it is instead somehow creating - how did you express it? - unnatural children when you depress it. Laughable

...it is instead somehow creating - how did you express it? - unnatural children when you depress it.

What I meant is of course, ...not doing it is instead creating - how did you express it? - unnatural children when you depress it.

Apologies all

I think this aplogist behaviour is a foul thing, formed by environment, nah

its a choice, at the end of it all its all a choice, do I don't I

[carvets]

Well, what's your thought on that matter? Do we enforce or fight the violence in those children by imposing more violence on them?

Difficult question. I haven't decided on a final position in this matter. Personally, I won't use any form of corporal punishment on a child ever, so my sympathies lean heavily toward this position. But at the same time I am not convinced that banning corporal punishment is the only correct position to hold.

I concur. Also as a high school student in Australia i was more a young man and less a child so the use of the term " children " may be a little overused and misplaced..

This is a thread about corporal punishment of children so the term children is hardly overused and misplaced

I apologise i thought it was about corporal punishment of students.

[MikeyIdea]

Difficult question. I haven't decided on a final position in this matter. Personally, I won't use any form of corporal punishment on a child ever, so my sympathies lean heavily toward this position. But at the same time I am not convinced that banning corporal punishment is the only correct position to hold.

I concur. Also as a high school student in Australia i was more a young man and less a child so the use of the term " children " may be a little overused and misplaced..

This is a thread about corporal punishment of children so the term children is hardly overused and misplaced

I apologise i thought it was about corporal punishment of students.

Yes, do that because this is a thread about punishment of children. The discussion would have been somewhat different had it been a discussion about corporal punishment of university students

Just a tad different perhaps? No?

[carvets]

I apologise i thought it was about corporal punishment of students.

Yes, do that because this is a thread about punishment of children. The discussion would have been somewhat different had it been a discussion about corporal punishment of university students

Just a tad different perhaps? No?

No !

[MikeyIdea]

I apologise i thought it was about corporal punishment of students.

Yes, do that because this is a thread about punishment of children. The discussion would have been somewhat different had it been a discussion about corporal punishment of university students

Just a tad different perhaps? No?

No !

You actually think that there had been no difference in what had been said here had this been a discussion not about corporal punishment of school children but about university students?

What do you base that reasoning on?

[koto]

Disgusting . If I caught a guy like him, doing what he did to my children - he would suffer for the rest of his life. Sadistic creature. Might cost me a few years beyond bars, but still worh it.

Then who would take care of your kids! That's worth it? I guess two wrongs make it right and the children suffer from both sides, smooth move.

[Considered Opinion]

This teacher needs to be caned, publicly.

Would something like this happen to my son, I'd pay somebody to let him know what real pain is. He wouldn't be back at school. How can you call him a teacher?

Okay, let's face it. some teachers at elementary schools are using bamboo sticks to hit the little kids. But it's over at high school level.

I hope the students in this movie will find him in the middle of the night.

Good to have cell phones in the classroom.........

Except I wouldn't pay anyone, I would rather inflict the damage myself. It would be swift and severe and people in Comas always have difficulty in pressing charges.

Quite amazing the rubbish you people talk. Dammed if you do dammed if you don't.

Of course now we have the interesting juxtaposition of children of the same age (14 to 16), shooting at each other in buses and killing nine-year-olds, and none of you can see the interesting issue of kids who get a spanking or some other form of formal discipline, and the appalling behaviour of today's teenagers.

How about a quick survey to see whether any of the children at the school to get this caning have been involved in any of the other violence seen recently around the streets.

[Deeral]

"the appalling behaviour of today's teenagers." - this statement has been made ANd recorded since Classical times - do you not think it might be a clue to how people perceive the situation from a purely personal; point of view

[Buchholz]

with the caning incident, it seems teachers AND administrators are coming under increased scrutiny... and for good reason. Hopefully, relocating them isn't the final solution.

Teachers in 2 Provinces Charged with Sexual Abuse

Police are pressing child molestation charges against two teachers in Surat Thani province, while another two teachers in Nakhon Si Thammarat are being investigated for allegedly sexually abusing 21 female students. Police have charged the Deputy Director of Surat Thani's Kanjanadit Wittayakom School with child sexual abuse after being alleged of luring a Grade 11 student and allowing a fellow teacher to also sexually abuse her.

Meanwhile in Nakhon Si Thammarat, Wirat Wuttipong and Boonme Jeenchaona, school teachers of Baan Tung Po School have been charged with sexually abusing 21 female students. Parents and guardians of the victims traveled to Cha-Ouad police station to testify against the two suspects. After questioning the 21 students, police summoned the teachers who have been charged with rape and the sexual abuse of minors.

Continues:

-- Tan Network 2010-09-03

Edited September 3, 2010 by Buchholz

[HereIAm]

with the caning incident, it seems teachers AND administrators are coming under increased scrutiny... and for good reason. Hopefully, relocating them isn't the final solution.

Teachers in 2 Provinces Charged with Sexual Abuse

Why is this being brought up in a discussion on caning ? Is it meant to show that teachers who cane students are suspected to be sexually deviant ? If so, that is a motivated slant. If not, well, you would do well to remember that sexual molestation or abuse is a perversion that is present in all fraternities, professions and countries around the world. Whether it is the church, temple, school, factory, office, police, army, presidential office, or simply the legions of hotels around the world. So I don't see any particular reason to bring up this here.

A point was made earlier on in this discussion that if a teacher could get physical with a student by caning to express anger, it is worrisome to think that the same teacher might get physical to express affection too. This appears to be dramatic rhetoric, that employs the tactic of ominous implication, to drive home the point that caning should be avoided. Remember that the typical caning, as practiced in the schools of yore, was NOT in anger. No good headmaster ever caned a student in anger. It was a well-considered and stern act of disciplining.

Doubtlessly, as several have pointed out, if caning is already a crime in the land then caning is illegal. This again is not the real point to be discussed. Of course it is illegal if it is not allowed. Parents, teachers and government authorities need to evaluate the experience of the past thirty years or so and re-evaluate the merits and demerits of caning. Even the proud peacock preens its feathers.

[Deeral]

"as practiced in the schools of yore, was NOT in anger. No good headmaster ever caned a student in anger. It was a well-considered and stern act of disciplining. " - utter <deleted>!

[way2muchcoffee]

"as practiced in the schools of yore, was NOT in anger. No good headmaster ever caned a student in anger. It was a well-considered and stern act of disciplining. " - utter <deleted>!

I believe he said "No good headmaster..."

This does not mean that there were no bad headmasters who did cane students in anger. If I am not mistaken this means that the poster believes good headmasters used caning as a disciplinary tool. Implicit in this is that the good headmasters thought that caning is both appropriate and effective in curbing antisocial behaviors.

You may well have a different opinion. I do not deny that your opinions on this matter could very well be true. But your knee-jerk reaction is noted.

Edited September 3, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Deeral]

No "good" headmaster would use the cane

[Deeral]

I'm not angry - this will hurt me more than it'll hurt you.......yeah, right!

[Deeral]

I'm not angry - this will hurt me more than it'll hurt you.......yeah, right!

[way2muchcoffee]

I'm not angry - this will hurt me more than it'll hurt you.......yeah, right!

Is it so hard to believe that others, in perfectly good faith, had beliefs that differed from yours and then acted properly in accordance with their beliefs, and completely without malice?

Edited September 3, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Deeral]

I think way2much was caned as a kid- don't you?

[way2muchcoffee]

I think way2much was caned as a kid- don't you?

Indeed. I was struck once in the 3rd grade for beating up a 5th grader who was picking on a girl in my class. He pushed her into a mud puddle and I didn't like it. He was a bully and I felt compelled to put a stop to his actions.

My mother was a fire inspector with friends in city hall and she marched down to the school and made it clear to the principal that if he ever laid a hand on me again she would ensure that he never worked as a school administrator again. In the next year the state I was living in made corporal punishment illegal.

Are you satisfied?

I would suggest that the question you posed to the board was a veiled ad hominem attack on me. Perhaps you could use reasoned argument in the future.

Edited September 3, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Deeral]

actually that's not an ad hominem attack - as it was connected to the argument

[way2muchcoffee]

Do you think my experience in the 3rd grade is relevant to my questioning the validity of your arguments, and more specifically to your labeling a post above as 'utter <deleted>'? Let me also remind you that I have already stated that my behavior with respect to children and students is perfectly in accordance with your beliefs.

With regards to ad hominem arguments, allow me to quote wikipedia

An ad hominem, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.[1] The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy.[2] The argumentum ad hominem is not always fallacious, for in some instances questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]

So you can see that your objection to my labeling your question as ad hominem is invalid. Note that I did not say your argument was fallacious.

Moreover, I strongly suspect that your general question to the board was intended to discredit the validity of my posts due to some event that you imagined may have occurred in my past, but of which you had no knowledge. Do you deny it?

Edited September 3, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[way2muchcoffee]

self deleted

Edited September 3, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[Thaddeus]

I think way2much was caned as a kid- don't you?

I think you need to stop posting on the internet until you have some real life experience.... and learned something from it.

Reply to this with some sarcastic remark, and you are going straight in the troll-bin, and ignore list.

"Critical thinking at its best states that if you criticize everything, you just end up being ignored by everyone"

[paulrobertlane]

Quite amazing the rubbish you people talk. Dammed if you do dammed if you don't.

Of course now we have the interesting juxtaposition of children of the same age (14 to 16), shooting at each other in buses and killing nine-year-olds, and none of you can see the interesting issue of kids who get a spanking or some other form of formal discipline, and the appalling behaviour of today's teenagers.

How about a quick survey to see whether any of the children at the school to get this caning have been involved in any of the other violence seen recently around the streets.

I think you are missing the point a little. Its NOT about whether or not its right to hit kids, its about whether or not its right for teachers to break the law.

On one hand you are (seemingly) advocating the necessity for the rule of law.

On the other had you are (seemingly) saying its OK for teachers to have no respect for the rule of law and to break them.

We are talking about people in a position of trust quite openly sticking up the finger to the law of the land. Do you seriously think its OK for criminals to be working in schools regardless of your personal opinion on corporal punishment?

Edited September 4, 2010 by paulrobertlane

[tominbkk]

There's a grisly scene in Natural Born Killers in a prison, where the director of the prison beforehand is shown walking around with a phallic looking cattle prod, zapping prisoners who aren't even misbehaving just to let them know who's in charge. Then there is a prison riot, and the last you see of the director his pants are being pulled down and his legs pulled wide open while the cattle prod is getting readied.

All that teacher was doing was promoting his own sadistic fantasies...there was no lesson being learned, no behavior being corrected. You could see from his facial and physical expression that this was his absolute favorite way to get his rocks off, by abusing young boys through mutilation of their genital area. No matter what the state of misbehavior in this school, that sick fuc_k and those like him have no place being around children.

I'm surprised there are so many posters actually defending what he was doing.

[HereIAm]

No "good" headmaster would use the cane

You have based your judgement of a "good" headmaster on his not using a cane. This is arbitrary and devoid of the wisdom of experience or observation. I have known not just the good headmaster of my school who wielded the cane with the kind cruelty of a surgeon's knife but also good headmasters of other schools who also used the cane in their schools. My school as well as the other schools did produce outstanding students who I still believe to this day are not matched by the quality of kids that are turned out by today's schools -- in terms of conduct, discipline and manners. So caning per se cannot form the basis to judge a headmaster as bad. It is the result that matters. Fifty years on today do I still look back on my headmaster with reverence or with hate ? When we had a reunion of batchmates some years ago the encomiums to our good old headmaster flowed like fine wine. I meet students of other schools of my time who also look back with reverence on their headmasters.

To my mind, it is important that parents and teachers inculcate a sense of discrimination between the desirable and the undesirable behaviours in children when they are small and impressionable. You may succeed in doing this through modern practices of patient counselling and "walking along " with the child. It is great if that works. What do you do when that doesn't work ? It is easy to understand that the same methods do not work with 100 percent efficiency on all kids. Kids come from different backgrounds. Disciplining works only when it is implemented with authority. You cannot be talking and counselling and reasoning all the time, specially with constituents where the ability to see reason is blocked. Then it is threat of action that has the next chance of success. Even that might not work in some extreme cases. But we need to have that tier as the next resort. Coaches do that with players, the police does that with criminals, governments have that resort with corporations who don't adhere to the law .... these are just different forms of "caning" in later life.

Would you feel safe in a world in which policemen are stripped of the baton and the gun, governments are stripped of the power of acting against terrorists, soldiers are told to fight without guns, and so on, just because the "human rights" of wrong doers must be protected ? That is happening already in several developing countries whose projects and developmental activities are being stymied and thwarted by just these considerations.

My belief is that, if wielded well at school, the cane would reduce the incidence of the other forms of "caning" in later life.

Edited September 4, 2010 by HereIAm

[HereIAm]

I think way2much was caned as a kid- don't you?

With all respect, that seemed an unbecoming way to fight your way out of a debate. You will, I think, carry more credibility if you refrain from ridicule and argue the points specifically with reason rather than rhetoric or ridicule.

Edited September 4, 2010 by HereIAm

[Fookhaht]

Interesting to see how polarized the TV members are on the subject of corporal punishment.

As a career teacher, I've seen thousands of students (ages 5 - 21) over 30+ years in the classroom. I've dealt with hundreds of families over discipline issues. I must admit that this extended observation has taught me that "Spare the rod, spoil the child," is as valid a proverb today as it was 3,000 years ago when it was penned by the world's wisest man, King Solomon.

However, a blow that leaves bruises and marks goes beyond the necessary means to get a child's attention. Incidentally, the word "child" in the proverb refers to a pre-pubescent child. They respond best to corporal punishment, provided it is followed up by a parent who reaffirms their love for the child afterwards (holding the child on their lap, talking it out in an affirmative manner, etc.).

When a child starts growing up, there are a lot more effective measures of discipline to encourage him/her to conform to rules that were designed for their benefit. Teachers/parents who ignore the stages of growth when it comes to discipline are committing a grievous error in judgment. I submit the teacher depicted on the video has no concept of how young people learn and respond to his brand of authority.

[jackr]

I submit the teacher depicted on the video has no concept of how young people learn and respond to his brand of authority.

The guy's a complete loon and no amount of waffle could detract otherwise. He needs to be whacked and I'm surprised the parents haven't, as yet, obliged.

[thaimelody]

A good candidate to be evaluated for -

Sadistic personality disorder is:

A] A pervasive pattern of cruel, demeaning, and aggressive behavior, beginning by early adulthood, as indicated by the repeated occurrence of at least four of the following:

1. has used physical cruelty or violence for the purpose of establishing dominance in a relationship (not merely to achieve some non-interpersonal goal, such as striking someone in order to rob him/her).

2. humiliates or demeans people in the presence of others.

3. has treated or disciplined someone under his/her control unusually harshly.

4. is amused by, or takes pleasure in, the psychological or physical suffering of others (including animals).

5. has lied for the purpose of harming or inflicting pain on others (not merely to achieve some other goal).

6. gets other people to do what he/she wants by frightening them (through intimidation or even terror).

7. restricts the autonomy of people with whom he or she has a close relationship, e.g., will not let spouse leave the house unaccompanied or permit teenage daughter to attend social functions.

8. is fascinated by violence, weapons, injury, or torture.

B] The behavior in A has not been directed toward only one person (e.g., spouse, one child) and has not been solely for the purpose of sexual arousal (as in sexual sadism).

Please read the text, nobody here needs a lesson. No need to google weird shit. Wake up.

great reply and i agree 100%