Mom gets probation, loses kid for spanking

**Cidp24** · 07-14-11, 12:40 PM

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas – A Texas mom has been sentenced to probation and has lost custody of her children for spanking her daughter.
Rosalina Gonzáles of Corpus Christi pleaded guilty on Wednesday to Injury to a Child for swatting the 2-year-old on her buttocks.
According to prosecutors, Gonzáles in December hit the girl with an open hand, leaving some red marks

KZTV10.com reports that the ruling judge in the case made it clear that spanking is a crime.

"You don't spank children today," Judge Jose Longoria is quoted as having said. "In the old days, maybe we got spanked, but there was a different quarrel. You don't spank children."

Read more: Texas Mom Gets Probation, Loses Kids, for Spanking her Daughter - Fox News Latino

Wow. My parents would have gotten the chair if this was the way people thought when I was a kid.

**Captain America** · 07-14-11, 01:11 PM

Bullshit. That's why juvenile crime is rampant. You get a parent that at least tries to be a damn parent and she get's convicted of a crime ? The state might as well go ahead and take custody of this kid since the mother has been undercut by the state and lost all parental authority with the kid.
Mother :" Little Janie do your homework."
Little Janie : " I would rather not."
Mother: " I said do your homework."
Little Jane: " I said no , you can't make me and if you keep harassing me , I'll call the police. You know your on probation Mommie Dearest."
I hope the state is ready to rise a lot of kids. Dumbasses.

**pac201** · 07-14-11, 01:29 PM

Wow, just wow...

**Pudge** · 07-14-11, 01:32 PM

Guess I can't pass a background in Texas now. If my kids need a spanking, they get a spanking.

**MacLean** · 07-14-11, 01:50 PM

I'd be surprised if that wasn't overturned.

RCW 9A.16.100

Use of force on children — Policy — Actions presumed unreasonable.

It is the policy of this state to protect children from assault and abuse and to encourage parents, teachers, and their authorized agents to use methods of correction and restraint of children that are not dangerous to the children. However, the physical discipline of a child is not unlawful when it is reasonable and moderate and is inflicted by a parent, teacher, or guardian for purposes of restraining or correcting the child. Any use of force on a child by any other person is unlawful unless it is reasonable and moderate and is authorized in advance by the child's parent or guardian for purposes of restraining or correcting the child.

The following actions are presumed unreasonable when used to correct or restrain a child: (1) Throwing, kicking, burning, or cutting a child; (2) striking a child with a closed fist; (3) shaking a child under age three; (4) interfering with a child's breathing; (5) threatening a child with a deadly weapon; or (6) doing any other act that is likely to cause and which does cause bodily harm greater than transient pain or minor temporary marks. The age, size, and condition of the child and the location of the injury shall be considered when determining whether the bodily harm is reasonable or moderate. This list is illustrative of unreasonable actions and is not intended to be exclusive.

[1986 c 149 § 1.]

**MacLean** · 07-14-11, 01:52 PM

From the AG website in Texas:

Is spanking okay?
Texas law allows the use of force, but not deadly force, against a child by the child's parent, guardian, or other person who is acting in loco parentis. Most parents do, in fact, use corporal punishment (in the form of spanking) at least occasionally, and most do not, in fact, consider it abusive. Experts disagree about the advisability of ever spanking a child. Some say that, combined with other methods of discipline, mild spanking of a small child is harmless and effective. Others claim that other methods of discipline work as well as spanking or better, and that spanking is not necessary. Many child advocates and experts in child development contend that all forms of corporal punishment, including spanking, are harmful. Most believe that spanking an infant is always inappropriate. The law does not attempt to arbitrate between the different views on the best method of disciplining a child. What we do know is that severe corporal punishment can be extremely damaging and dangerous, and this is what the law prohibits as abuse.

**Captain America** · 07-14-11, 01:53 PM

Is that the Texas statute , Mac ?

**jmur5074** · 07-14-11, 02:01 PM

I hope she pushes this case farther down the road.

Clearly common sense and the statute/AG opinion Mac posted support overturning the judges ruling.

**Xiphos** · 07-14-11, 02:37 PM

Won't fly here.

AS 11.81.430. Justification: Use of Force, Special Relationships.

(a) The use of force upon another person that would otherwise constitute an offense is justified under any of the following circumstances:
(1) When and to the extent reasonably necessary and appropriate to promote the welfare of the child or incompetent person, a parent, guardian, or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a child under 18 years of age or an incompetent person may use reasonable and appropriate nondeadly force upon that child or incompetent person.
(2) When and to the extent reasonably necessary and appropriate to maintain order and when the use of force is consistent with the welfare of the students, a teacher may, if authorized by school regulations and the principal of the school, use reasonable and appropriate nondeadly force upon a student. If authorized by school regulations and the principal of the school, a teacher may use nondeadly force under this paragraph in any situation in which the teacher is responsible for the supervision of students. A teacher employed by a school board, including a regional educational attendance area school board, may use nondeadly force under this paragraph only if the school regulations authorizing the use of force have been adopted by the school board.
(3) When and to the extent reasonably necessary and appropriate to maintain order, a person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common carrier of passengers, or a person acting under that person's direction, may use reasonable and appropriate nondeadly force.
(4) When and to the extent reasonably necessary to prevent a suicide, a person who reasonably believes that another is imminently about to commit suicide may use reasonable and appropriate nondeadly force upon that person.
(5) A licensed physician, licensed mobile intensive care paramedic, or registered nurse; or a person acting under the direction of a licensed physician, licensed mobile intensive care paramedic, or registered nurse; or any person who renders emergency care at the scene of an emergency, may use reasonable and appropriate nondeadly force for the purpose of administering a recognized and lawful form of treatment that is reasonably adapted to promoting the physical or mental health of the patient if
(A) the treatment is administered with the consent of the patient or, if the patient is a child under 18 years of age or an incompetent person, with the consent of the parent, guardian, or other person entrusted with care and supervision of the child or incompetent person; or
(B) the treatment is administered in an emergency if the person administering the treatment reasonably believes that no one competent to consent can be consulted under the circumstances and that a reasonable person, wishing to safeguard the welfare of the patient, would consent.
(b) A person who raises a defense under (a)(1) of this section and claims that the person upon whom force was used was an incompetent person has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that, at the time force was used, the person upon whom the force was used was an incompetent person.