Neighbours and their kids

Fire_Fox

1940sGal wrote: »

It's the way he's worded it, the way he's explained it that something doesn't sit right. My gut instinct is telling me that he's being a nosey neighbour and interfering in someone else's business which could explain why there's been trouble between them (though if he's right and, god forbid, the children are being abused then thank god he is a nosey neighbour). But the way he always happens to be there in the garden to hear/see these things or the way he's always hearing them through the wall. Personally the walls between myself and my neighbours are paper thin but that doesn't mean i hear everything they do. Life generally means i don't have time to sit around listening for possible trouble.

Plenty of people spend a lot of time in their garden - sometimes hours every day - gardening, relaxing, DIY or hobbies, BBQing, playing with their own children or pets. Just because your peers don't is not evidence that the OP is a nosy neighbour!! :eek:

It's not the way he has worded it, it is the way YOU are interpreting it based on your own life experiences, prejudices, interpretation and expectations. Maybe you have a lot of nasty or nosy neighbours in your street, other people have caring, helpful and friendly neighbours.

1940sGal wrote: »

It's great isn't it when you state an opinion, while still agreeing with the majority, but still get your words twisted

Again for those of you with limited capacity to understand I have said many times that the OP is right to make his concerns known to the NSPCC. But simply that something did not sit right.

People may resent that I think he's a nosey neighbour, but that is how he comes off to me. But again, I did say that if his concerns prove to be well founded (god forbid) [/b]then it's a good thing he was listening.[/B]

I guess I'll just have to live with myself being seen as the baddy here for not siding fully with the OP Ho hum!

Actually what you said was "though if he's right and, god forbid, the children are being abused then thank god he is a nosey neighbour". It's you who is twisting your own words, we understood your intent all too clearly.

1940sGal

Fire_Fox wrote: »

It's not the way he has worded it, it is the way YOU are interpreting it based on your own life experiences, prejudices, interpretation and expectations. Maybe you have a lot of nasty or nosy neighbours in your street, other people have caring, helpful and friendly neighbours.

I have some, but most are good natured and we get on fine.

Actually what you said was "though if he's right and, god forbid, the children are being abused then thank god he is a nosey neighbour". It's you who is twisting your own words, we understood your intent all too clearly.

How would you feel if someone made an allegation of this sort against you? This is what I'm getting at. Is the OP assuming that the sounds he hears are those of an abusive father based on the way he behaved toward his wife? I've seen nothing here to suggest that the father is beating his children in an unacceptable way. For all the OP knows he could merely be hearing a smack round the backside and the kids screaming as a result.

I'm just wanting to give the father the benefit of the doubt, that's all. Bad behaviour toward his wife does not automatically equal bad behaviour toward his children.

I know the OP heard one child asking another why their father smacked them, but as i stated that could mean anything.

All i'm saying is that I wouldn't like to have been accused of child abuse based on what someone heard. The OP has not stated whether he has or has not ever seen physical evidence of abuse on the children.

bazster

I quote the OP:

It sounds like the parents are hitting the kids multiple times.

Who are you to say that is not what he is hearing? Can you hear it too?

snow_ball

Is there an acceptable way to "beat" a child? It may be for some that a slap across the backside is considered effective, but if he's known to be abusive towards his wife/partner then I would be concerned that he does not have the judgement or patience to use physical punishment with his children.

VitaK

You are simply not allowed to hit anyone regardles of how bad there behaviour is. It dosent matter its a child or an adult. Relevant authorities should be notified.

Humans have a very good ability to recognise sounds. A 'smack' have a very distict sound.

bazster

I thought it was still legal to smack a child (once) so long as it's not hard enough to leave a mark?

Or maybe that's just some complete nonsense I picked up from goodness knows where.

VitaK

Just like you are not allowed to smack someone down at the pub (once), so long at its not hard enough to leave a mark.

bazster

VitaK wrote: »

Just like you are not allowed to smack someone down at the pub (once), so long at its not hard enough to leave a mark.

Looks like I am right and you are wrong, clever !!!!!!:

http://www.childrenslegalcentre.com/userfiles/Smacking.pdf

It is unlawful for a parent or carer to smack their child, except where this amounts to "reasonable punishment".
...
However, physical punishment will be considered "unreasonable" if it leaves a mark on the child

I'll take your apology as read.

VitaK

I stand corrected.

Very interesting reading. It does sound like a very narrow set of circumstances where a 'smack' is resonable and before it turns into criminal offence.

I like page 4. How to discipline without smacking.

1940sGal

bazster wrote: »

I quote the OP:

It sounds like the parents are hitting the kids multiple times.

Who are you to say that is not what he is hearing? Can you hear it too?

And who is anyone else to say that IS what he's hearing?