Quote (Scaly @ 8 Sep 2014 11:46)
I grew up in care and when I was about 13 or 14 some new laws came in that stopped the staff from physically interacting with children except when absolutely necessary to stop them hurting themselves or others - I.e. restraining them forcefully to stop a fight.
I remember a lot of us didn't mind being restrained. Restraints would happen often and I wonder if it wasn't simply a way to get attention or to feel intimate with our carers. This obviously has the impact of created a kind of fucked up reward for extremely bad behaviour.
These laws are still in place and to this day you cannot hug a child who is crying in care or nursery (kindergarten). If a child needs it's diaper changed there has to be two observers to ensure no molestation is going on.
What does PaRD think on this issue? Is it the same in the US? Is it a necessary measure or is it harmful to a child's development?
If you cannot hug a child or show compassion towards a child I think that is very disturbing. (Not you personally, the law)
Not any of those laws are here in the states afaik.
"If a child needs it's diaper changed there has to be two observers to ensure no molestation is going on."
I can agree that this might be a good idea, but the fact they even have this to "ensure no molestation happens" shows a red flag by iitself.. Who the hell are they hiring?
A kid that is crying is calling for compassion from someone to be cared for. That's 1 objective moral duty off the top of my head..
This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Sep 10 2014 06:01am