Instructor kicks student 200 times
Posted by: MattJ
Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 10:29 AM
WTF!
Saw this link over at BudoSeek:
http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-va--kickingarrest1126nov26,0,1593850.story
"SUFFOLK, Va. - A martial arts instructor has been arrested for kicking an 11-year-old student more than 200 times, causing internal injuries and possibly breaking a rib.
Police say 47-year-old Susan Bateman of Hampton was arrested November 20th and charged with one felony count of child endangerment.
Police Lieutenant D.J. George says Bateman issued a challenge November 7th during class at a Suffolk dojo to see how many kicks to the abdomen students could take. Students got into a push-up position while Bateman kicked, stopping when the student either said to or went to his or her knees. George says the 11-year-old boy and another student took more than 200 kicks as the class counted.
The student didn't tell his parents until he needed medical attention."
WHAT IN THE HELL WAS SHE THINKING?!?!
Posted by: Adjuntant_Reflex
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 12:45 PM
WHAT?! That instructer should be demoted to a white belt for that and thrown in jail!!!
Posted by: Leo_E_49
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 04:05 PM
This is terrible. It's always horrible when a teacher abuses their students.
And it reflects poorly on the MA community.
Posted by: Adjuntant_Reflex
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 04:25 PM
Yeah, as Mr. Myagi put it "No such thing as bad student,only bad teacher"
Posted by: hedkikr
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 04:55 PM
Let's see how many of my kicks she can take.
She should never be allowed to be near a MA school/club/gym again for the rest of her life (I'll make an exception for my club)
Posted by: JasonM
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 05:11 PM
pfft...where is everyones warrior spirit...That good training...j/k
Yeah, that is terrible...She is a bully, period...
Posted by: TKD-Skippi
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 07:21 PM
why did she want to do that....what possible benefit did she think it wold have? some people are just crazier than the average person....
Posted by: drgndrew
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/01/07 08:37 PM
I do not condone the actions but this is blown out of proportion in my view. yes it was an extreme lack of judgment on the instructors part, but she made a mistake and from all accounts she is going to pay for it, long after we here forget about it.
it was voluntary and she stop if the student indicated they had enough, or if there knees touched the ground. only one student was injured, infact another lasted longer. over 200 kicks they must not have been very hard. this type of training would be fine in an older student. the only mistake she made was to apply it to such a young age group.
what injuries where actually made. it said internal injuries and MAYBE a broken rib. hell at that age I had the same thing playing soccer. I had broke my finger trying to catch a young steer, and I don't know how many times I fell out of trees
Again before the do-gooders condemn me for condoning child abuse, this was not child abuse, it was neglectful treatment for sure but not abuse. Hell you see a 7 or 8 yr old competing in a thai match and everyone says it's so cute and he'll be great when he's older. Children are encourage to play full contact football, hockey etc is that not a form of child abuse too then.
Sure she stuffed up big time but I doubt very much that she is the evil old crone that people are making her out to be.
Posted by: TKD-Skippi
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 05:01 AM
your quite right, she probably not the evil crone. I just think theres difference between letting a child play a full contact sport and kicking them repeatedly in the guts. yeah I've broken a few bones and got whiplash mountain biking and skateboarding but not internal injuries to the extant that i needed to see a doctor. I think calling this 'training' is a bit of a stretch.
Posted by: Leo_E_49
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 06:23 AM
The difference between a contact sport and child abuse is that in a contact sport, the child knows of and agrees to participate in an activity where they have control over whether they do get injured, attempts are made to avoid injury and injury should only occur in the case of an accident. Child abuse is when someone forces a child to undergo pain and injury, either by manipulation or by physically forcing them to. I would call what she did child abuse.
Here is how the Australian Sports Commission defines child abuse in sports:
http://www.ausport.gov.au/ethics/cpoverview.aspI'm sure governments elsewhere would view this issue in a similar manner.
The act of kicking your students repeatedly as a form of punishment is dubious as it is, regardless of their age.
Posted by: drgndrew
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 07:28 AM
Quote:
Child abuse is when someone forces a child to undergo pain and injury, either by manipulation or by physically forcing them to. I would call what she did child abuse.
Leo it wasn't punishment it was a challenge it was voluntary and the student knew what was involved and only had to say so and it would have stopped, (also if he had dropped in the pushup position. none of your definition existed in this case. there was no deliberate intent to injure which made it accidental (even though stupid and avoidable)
This was not abuse, it was simply a gross misjudgment on behalf of the instructor, negligence even, for which she is being punished for.
Posted by: shoveldog
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 08:12 AM
Quote:
The difference between a contact sport and child abuse is that in a contact sport, the child knows of and agrees to participate in an activity where they have control over whether they do get injured, attempts are made to avoid injury and injury should only occur in the case of an accident.
The "consent" of an 11 year old is legally meaningless. The fact that this child participated "voluntarily" is no more a legal defense here than in an instance of statutory rape; we call it "statutory" rape because it's a crime despite the participant's consent. Whether this conduct constitutes abuse is a legal question, but the child's "consent" is not an issue.
Posted by: hedkikr
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 02:41 PM
shovel is correct...& your contact sport analogy doesn't apply. One thing that really burns me
is when people use the word "mistake" to justify their own & others' bad actions. This wasn't a mistake it was bad judgment, sadism, bully behavior or any combination thereof.
A mistake is when I take a R-turn instead of a L-turn in a city I've never visited, putting too much salt in a dish I'm experimenting w/, calling some Andrew instead of Alfred.
The litmus test is this: What would you do if a video camera was documenting your every move? There are times that strong emotions negatively effect our actions...that's bad judgment. There are times when peers negatively effect our behavior...bad judgment. But don't try to make it OK by calling it a mistake ("OK" because ~& how many times have you heard this?~ "everyone makes mistakes"...BS).
No, drgn, you're completely wrong on this one. Kids tend to be more susceptible to peer pressure & a desire to please authority figures than adults. That's why, in my opinion, the kid lasted so long. I've been party to Child Protective Services reports that detailed the amount of abuse that, if it happened to you, would result in incarceration of the perpatrator. But the kids never reported out of fear & their own expectations for correct behavior.
BTW..."Neglect", in most civilized countries, is categorized as abuse when it applies to children, the elderly & the disabled - those who cannot take care of themselves..
owari
Posted by: Leo_E_49
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 08:48 PM
Quote:
Leo it wasn't punishment it was a challenge it was voluntary ... for which she is being punished for.
Well, I can say that even if it was their choice, the expectation presented to them that they should endure pain is classified by the Australian Sports Commission as child abuse.
Quote:
physical abuse – non-accidental injury and/or harm to a child.
I tend to agree with them on this one. No child should be asked to endure physical or mental attacks, for any reason.
Posted by: drgndrew
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 09:40 PM
I'm not going get in an argument which is based on semantics. You all know damn well the point i am making.
Remove your emotional filter for a second people. every single argument you used against me can be applied to a child playing gridiron, rugby or any other contact sport.
According to you we should not allow anyone under the age of 18 participate in any sport or activity that involves contact. do you instruct children under the age of 18, if you have any sort of physical test such as a grading , if you have any form of sparring during class then you are from your arguments committing child abuse. any junior boxing match is child abuse, allowing a child to ride a motorbike is child abuse.
Stop pretending you are holier then now, and superior to everyone else I bet you have made a few mistakes in judgement over the years, Shovel-dog comparing this action with child sexual abuse is plain stupid and wrong. have you ever broke the law, my bet is yes and knowingly at that.
As I have said in every post:
I AM NOT CONDONING HER ACTIONS, SHE WAS WRONG AND SHE IS BEING PUNISHED BY THE LAW FOR HER ACTIONS.
however there has been a lot of exaggeration and inferring going on though out this thread. People have been assuming intent on behalf of the instructor when none has been mentioned infact no comment has been made from her at all only a news report that comes from one side of the story. We all know journalists are prone to sensationalism.
People have judged this person on the basis of a couple of paragraphs, she did wrong but I do not believe she deserved the title and the associated stigma associated with being labeled a child abuser.
We all say we want to make the world a better place, well are you really doing that by judging others and condemning on such little information. every one comments on the state of the world, well it wouldn't be such if people didn't assume the worst of everyone.
most of us come from countries that presume innocence's, not that you would know.
Posted by: shoveldog
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 11:04 PM
I'm not comparing this incident to anything. I simply pointed out that legally, the voluntary participation, or consent, of a minor is not a defense. I thought statutory rape provided a clear example of that principle. We don't let minors consent to certain types of conduct because of the risk of exploitation. They're simply too easily influenced by adult authority figures.
This incident would appear to me to be an apt example. The boy, due to his age wasn't capable of making a sound, mature decision. We shouldn't expect him to. With an adult instructor, however, society, and the law, have a right to to expect better judgment.
Posted by: Leo_E_49
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/02/07 11:49 PM
Quote:
I'm not going get in an argument which is based on semantics. You all know damn well the point i am making.
Having read your explanation, I do understand what you are saying and you do make good points to support your view. I agree with you on many of your points and can understand why you have that view. I'm not saying that your reasoning is unsound, I'm just saying that I see it a different way. Just my opinion that's all.
Posted by: hedkikr
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 02:44 AM
Quote:
Remove your emotional filter for a second people. every single argument you used against me can be applied to a child playing gridiron, rugby or any other contact sport.
According to you we should not allow anyone under the age of 18 participate in any sport or activity that involves contact. do you instruct children under the age of 18, if you have any sort of physical test such as a grading , if you have any form of sparring during class then you are from your arguments committing child abuse. any junior boxing match is child abuse, allowing a child to ride a motorbike is child abuse.
You're arguing that being kicked by an adult several times is equal to 2 kids colliding on the gridiron?
And in your mind 2 kids sparring/boxing is the same as being kicked repeatedly in the gut?
You further equate a kid falling off a dirt bike to a one-sided fight (o0nly 1 person is doing the striking)?
If that's the best you got, you're really bent.
Sure, sure...we can't trust the media because all they want to do is sell advertising vis sensationalism @ the expense of the facts. Look, I (& everyone here) gets it that she innocent until proven guilty. But guess what...this is an opinion forum, not her jury. Sure, there's also her side of the story...I'd really like to hear it. Do you know more that the rest of us? You said that she was being "PUNISHED BY THE LAW"...I thought it was an indictment.
owari
Posted by: drgndrew
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 04:23 AM
Quote:
If that's the best you got, you're really bent.
dude I think this is a bit harsh, man.
Thats not what I'm arguing, (and you know it). I was saying that if you use the argument that the child is not responsible for his decision to volunteer the it is child abuse to allow them to play contact sport or provide them with a means to cause injury to them selves. I did not at any time equate what happened with these sports etc only that adults regularly force their children to do things that can result in injury with out giving them the choice.
You are right this is an opinion forum, and I have simply put forward my opinion. I am pointing out the folly's of forming an opinion on little information. particularly when that opinion affix's the label of "child abuser". a term that has wide spread connotations.
Posted by: Isshinryukid4life
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 07:01 AM
Quote:
You are right this is an opinion forum, and I have simply put forward my opinion. I am pointing out the folly's of forming an opinion on little information. particularly when that opinion affix's the label of "child abuser". a term that has wide spread connotations.
Drgndrew,are you a defense atty?& If so are you a defense atty that defends those who'm you believe are wrongly arrested/convicted of child abuse?
I'm just curious,as to why you're defending someone who would kick a child/minor 200 times in the stomach?
Posted by: Blackrainbow
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 07:30 AM
I don't know about the state laws where this instructor lives but here in Florida she would be looking at major prison time. In my state an 11 year old child doe not have the "right" to consent to such treatment. Last week I had a father who brought his three sons to my class asking about lessons. They have been taking instruction at another local school where the instructor evidently believes that it's ok to practice full contact technique on children. The boys age 6-11 told me the sensei actually attacks his students with an unpadded wood bo staff. They are expected to block or avoid the strike and if they miss----oh well they get hit. The dad told me his 11 year old came home with a big purple goose egg in the middle of his forehead. Sorry, this is not appropriate training for children.
Posted by: Victor Smith
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 10:30 AM
Drew,
When someone commits abusive acts, their lawyer/solicitor might be interested in their intent, but it has little to do with how objective people see it.
We’re dealing with a world audience her on FA.com, depending on our personal orientation one persons hard training may well be an abusive action for another.
When the society intervenes, it defines abuse on its own terms and doesn’t seek out what other martial artists might consider abuse.
Abuse, child or adult, may be physical, sexual, mental or spiritual. In a broad definition all martial training falls within cult behavior, a small group of individuals surrendering their personal choice to obtain certain results, whether that training is benign or abusive in its usage.
Now where one society supports contact sport for youth to ‘toughen them up’, others can equally view the same activity from a physician’s point of view, see long term physiological damage to some of the participants and define the entire activity as too dangerous to be permitted to continue. Of course physicians are not of one mind on such an issue, but many have made a case that these sports are not healthy for anyone, especially the young. It might just come down to the question how important is one life threatening, life changing mishap versus the rest getting through it.
Participants have no say in the society designation of such activities, except as the same voice any other member of the society holds, nor more, no less.
Having trained young people for 30+ years there is no question in my mind the activity sparking this discussion in a case of abuse. I would even consider if I put you, an adult, through the same challenge, and you were injured too, there would be a clear case of abuse for the legal system to bring. Contrary to myth, you cannot surrender your rights not to be hurt by an instructor. This becomes very nebulous when an adult chooses to undergo very advanced severe training, but the instructor is never off the hook if something unforeseen occurs. Even if it is desired.
Don’t decry the journalist profession for playing up stories, the truth is as far as the martial arts they’ve done an extremely poor job really documenting all of the abusive situations, adult and child, that have taken place. I have seen more instances of abusive training of youth and adults over the years than I care to think about. Each type of abuse I’ve already details exists. Should an extreme instance reach large public awareness, and should the journalists really dig into the totality of what has taken place around the world in the name of the martial arts, there will be an lot of uncomfortable people that will find the public will find some other place to spend their time.
It’s just in the way of the world, we’re too small potatoes to spend any time looking at what happens, except for cute stories.
What we face and see again and again is what we as a group have done to ourselves, a really poor job training instructors and policing our arts.
Posted by: shoveldog
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 12:11 PM
Quote:
Contrary to myth, you cannot surrender your rights not to be hurt by an instructor. This becomes very nebulous when an adult chooses to undergo very advanced severe training, but the instructor is never off the hook if something unforeseen occurs. Even if it is desired.
Foreseeability is indeed part of the issue. When you consent to participate in a contact sport, you're only consenting to the type of contact that normally occurs in that sport. An American football player consents to be tackled, and if he's injured, his assumption of the risk can be raised as a defense. He doesn't consent, however, to be hit with brass knuckles by an opposing player. Silly example, but it makes the point. I seem to remember some relatively recent criminal charges resulting from a strike with a hockey stick during a professional game, and perhaps that's a better example.
Likewise, the football player's voluntary participation does not waive his right to recover for his coach's negligence. As a general rule, you can't waive negligence.
Therefore, if a coach of a high school football team lets a kid play injured when he knew or should have know of the risk, he's negligent if the kid gets seriously hurt.
The same rule applies to adults training in martial arts. You consent to the typical harms that might occur, but you don't consent to being hurt due to faulty equipment, unsafe conditions, or dangerous acts by the instructor.
Every gym I've ever trained in had a written release which "waives" negligence. All are ineffective. Despite what the document may say, the typical release simply operates as an acknowledgement that certain risks are implicit in participation in the activity.
Back on point, I don't think letting an 11 year old choose to be kicked 200 times by his instructor is a risk that a jury would feel is typical for martial arts training.
Posted by: drgndrew
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 10:34 PM
Quote:
Drgndrew,are you a defense atty?& If so are you a defense atty that defends those who'm you believe are wrongly arrested/convicted of child abuse?
I'm just curious,as to why you're defending someone who would kick a child/minor 200 times in the stomach?
Nope I'm definitely not a defence attorney or similar. and I am not defending the instructor.... In every post I have condemned her actions, I have stated that she was in the wrong with regards to the action. My argument is against the, what I consider harsh, labeling of the instructor as a child abuser, based on only a small amount of journalism. labels like this should not be used loosely. just like the term rapist should be used loosely. if you are going to attach such a label to someone then at least be dead sure (unemotionally) that it is true, other wise you could ruin an innocent persons life.
I do not believe what we have been presented with sufficient info to make that claim. This is my opinion. if you honestly believe this is person is a child abuser then that is your opinion. But I believe that judgement has been born from emotional response as compared to fact. she may very well be, but I choose to hear more evidence before condemning her as such.
I agree with Blackrainbow, the eg's he provided and the instructors actions are not appropriate training for children. It is putting the child at risk and it is endangering their health. whether the instructors deserve the label of child abuser would. IMO, require more investigation. note I am not say they do not deserve the title all I'm saying is that I want to make sure ( just like the courts do). this doesn't mean that action shouldn't be taken to ensure the safety of the children, that should of course be the number one priority, and I would rather someone over react in protecting the child, but automatically labeling someone does nothing to protect the child.
It is proven that they are infact a child abuser, then let the world know and let them face the consequences. Apt punishment I say. but you wouldn't condemn a person to life in prison with out being sure and giving them a fair trial ....... a label like this is a life sentence.
the term child abuser implies intent.... when you think of a child abuser you think of someone seeking out children. in my eyes child abuse has intent behind it. there is a big difference between abusing a child and injuring one through stupidity. and I am not saying that action shouldn't be taken, but lets make the punishment fit the crime.
Quote:
shovel is correct...& your contact sport analogy doesn't apply. One thing that really burns me is when people use the word "mistake" to justify their own & others' bad actions. This wasn't a mistake it was bad judgment, sadism, bully behavior or any combination there of.
this was posted by hedkikr notice the last sentence, this is an example of emotion distorting the given facts. there is absolutely no indication of sadism or bullying. Bad judgement can be assumed to to the consequences and but ad judgement is in fact a form of mistake. Is a mistake in judgement, constituent to child abuse, well you decide but decide using facts and not emotion. It is my opinion that there is not enough information presented to make that call.
I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that I wouldn't jump to conclusions on such little evidence. it would seem that from many arguments I've seen here that because a child can not be held accountable for there decision ( ie give consent) then any act or non-act that leads to injury of a minor is child abuse. Encouraging your child to participate in contact sport is child abuse. I'm not comparing the two acts but the argument behind it.
There's one other thing I want to point out there were two hundred kicks, think about it how hard was she actually kicking, they most definitely were not full contact, this indicates a true lack of intend to injure on behalf of the instructor. lets be honest these kicks had to be light, it seems that people are assuming a full power soccer kick, an eleven year old would not be able to handle 2 full power kick from an average BB let alone 200.
and everyone seems to think that an 11 year old is stupid and can't make a decision, most 11 year olds I know would now exactly what was going on especially if they take 200 kicks, he knew he could stop it at any time and he was not forced to do it. if he allowed peer pressure or competitiveness to effect his decision to continue then that was still his choice. by the age of 11 kids know right from wrong, and are more then capable of making there own decisions in fact they are coming to the end of their 3 rd stage of cognitive development (Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development) they have basically completed their "concrete operations" development and entering the "formal operations" period of development. Maybe not in the eye of the law but they are more then capable of making decisions regarding there safety.
final words
Yes she did wrong, no I am not providing excuses, and yes i believe in assuming innocent until proven guilty and that the whole story needs to be looked at, yes I believe intent behind injury is important in defining abuse and no i don't believe kids should not play footy or climb trees and yes I respect you may have different views to me.
oh and yes I hate child abuse or abuse of any weaker being( animal child elderly) and yes I get angry at hearing these stories, which is another reason i want to make sure. after all hate and anger is a powerful force and should only be unleashed upon the truly "worthy", if you know what I mean.
Anyway this is my 2 cents, spend it as you wish.
-------
supporting and additional info
Period of Concrete Operations (age 7 - 11)
Characteristic Behavior:
Evidence for organized, logical thought. There is the ability to perform multiple classification tasks, order objects in a logical sequence, and comprehend the principle of conservation. thinking becomes less transductive and less egocentric. The child is capable of concrete problem-solving
Period of Formal Operations (age 11-15)
Characteristic Behavior:
Thought becomes more abstract, incorporating the principles of formal logic. The ability to generate abstract propositions, multiple hypotheses and their possible outcomes is evident. Thinking becomes less tied to concrete reality.
Posted by: hedkikr
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/03/07 11:33 PM
"My argument is against the, what I consider harsh, labeling of the instructor as a child abuser, based on only a small amount of journalism."
> I'd like to correct you...the charges weren't the result of a "small amount of journalism". I'd wager that the charges were brought by the kid's parents & resulted in the story being reported.
"the term child abuser implies intent.... "
> I don't know where you get your definitions from but from a social services perspective, negligence or wanton disregard can also result in child abuse. Take for example the mother that left her 18 mo.-old baby in her car seat while she went in for 2 hrs of drinking during a hot august day in Texas. I'm sure she didn't "intend" to slowly bake her baby but that's exactly what happened. The baby died but by your definition, the mother isn't a child abuser. Remember, all she wanted was a little drinky.
"final words
Yes she did wrong, no I am not providing excuses, and yes i believe in assuming innocent until proven guilty"
> Again, we, the public @ large, don't have to assume innocence because we're not on the jury. I been on 5 jury cases in my life. Following the review of the charges/complaint, I had an opinion - that's natural & every juror, atty & judge will bear me out. Then as the trial progresses, the weight of the evidence will cause you to render a decision. In 1 case, my decision was the opposite of my initial impression due to the evidence. So far, we have no evidence because we're discussing a story - that's all. My posts won't have a bit of leverage on the instructor's fate.
My quote
"This wasn't a mistake it was bad judgment, sadism, bully behavior or any combination there of."
Your response
"this was posted by hedkikr notice the last sentence, this is an example of emotion distorting the given facts. "
> OK, so if it wasn't as I described, what was it? Are you still going to label her actions a "mistake"? ("Oops, I accidentally kicked you 195 times too many. My bad, I guess I just lost track of the time.")
Posted by: Ronin1966
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 12:51 AM
Her actions caused the death of a child. That is not semantics. The instructor striking a child seems a criminal act period. The ability to consent between adult and child does not exist.
<<labeled a child abuser.
I could think of several "alternate titles" of which abuser is the kindest.
Jeff
Posted by: drgndrew
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 02:32 AM
from Ronin1966
Quote:
Her actions caused the death of a child.
Jeff
Umm no it didn't, and that is a prime example of inferring your own assumptions read the article again Ronin.
Quote:
"My argument is against the, what I consider harsh, labeling of the instructor as a child abuser, based on only a small amount of journalism."
> I'd like to correct you...the charges weren't the result of a "small amount of journalism". I'd wager that the charges were brought by the kid's parents & resulted in the story being reported.[/quote
the story was reported after the charges, she has not been charged with child abuse and I quote
"Police say 47-year-old Susan Bateman of Hampton was arrested November 20th and charged with one felony count of child endangerment. "
Quote:
the term child abuser implies intent.... "
> I don't know where you get your definitions from but from a social services perspective, negligence or wanton disregard can also result in child abuse.
yes and thank you for selectively quoting me lets include the whole quote shall we, i said
"the term child abuser implies intent.... when you think of a child abuser you think of someone seeking out children. In my eyes child abuse has intent behind it . there is a big difference between abusing a child and injuring one through stupidity. and I am not saying that action shouldn't be taken, but lets make the punishment fit the crime."
[quote}
Take for example the mother that left her 18 mo.-old baby in her car seat while she went in for 2 hrs of drinking during a hot august day in Texas. I'm sure she didn't "intend" to slowly bake her baby but that's exactly what happened. The baby died but by your definition, the mother isn't a child abuser. Remember, all she wanted was a little drinky.
What relevance has this to do with the case, this is a separate instance and unrelated... as for your sarcasm it is true she isn't an abuser, she was negligent and irresponsible. infact she would be charged with child endangerment and neglect causing death be even manslaughter. and there is a hell of a lot of difference between a 18 month old and a 11 year old. don't try to elicit a emotional response to try and sway people to your argument it just shows you can't argue the actual point on it's merit alone.
using the same tactic as you compare the two: does this woman and her actions, equate to the sodomizing of a 3 yr old . i didn't think so
Quote:
"final words
Yes she did wrong, no I am not providing excuses, and yes i believe in assuming innocent until proven guilty"
> Again, we, the public @ large, don't have to assume innocence because we're not on the jury. I been on 5 jury cases in my life. Following the review of the charges/complaint, I had an opinion - that's natural & every juror, atty & judge will bear me out. Then as the trial progresses, the weight of the evidence will cause you to render a decision. In 1 case, my decision was the opposite of my initial impression due to the evidence. So far, we have no evidence because we're discussing a story - that's all. My posts won't have a bit of leverage on the instructor's fate.
So what your basically saying is that the law doesn't exist outside the courtroom. or at minimum the law doesn't apply to you. what you are arguing is that "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply to you except in the court. hmmmmm
Quote:
My quote
"This wasn't a mistake it was bad judgment, sadism, bully behavior or any combination there of."
Your response
"this was posted by hedkikr notice the last sentence, this is an example of emotion distorting the given facts. "
> OK, so if it wasn't as I described, what was it? Are you still going to label her actions a "mistake"? ("Oops, I accidentally kicked you 195 times too many. My bad, I guess I just lost track of the time.")
well yes it was a mistake in judgement, do you think she had 200 in her mind, I doubt it she issued a challenge, she left it up to the kids to judge the number. but no you want to assume that this instructor deliberately kicked this kid 200 times and in a fit of rage. i think you will find that she was probably quite shocked and maybe even impressed that the youngster had the spirit to last so long.
Hedkikr You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that, I do not wish to argue with you, if you choose to condemn another human on hearsay, speculation and minimum facts then that only reflects on your character. it does not affect me at all. if you feel compelled to argue against the innocent until proven guilty rule of law then again it just goes to show.
My concern is the safety of the child (animal/elderly/weaker being) first, protect them first and lay labels and punishment after their safety has been secured. this to me seems the fair thing to do and it does what is required by law.
it protects children
and it prevent wrongful punishment.
i do not condone putting children in danger, if guilty a person should be punished to the full extent of the law. child endangerment is a serious crime and I have not said other wise. I am careful not to over label the person.
a person can kill but not be a murderer, eg manslaughter is still the fault of the person but the intent was not to murder. It is wrong to label someone who committed manslaughter with the label of murderer. it's a kin to saying that every soldier who had the misfortune of taking an enemies life is a murder, or every person that as killed in self defence is a murder. they are not. but it is still a tragedy that a life was lost no?
I will not respond to any more post on this thread As I have said my piece, I leave you to believe what you wish, please allow me to do the same.
Posted by: Dobbersky
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 03:26 AM
Sensei, Sempai and Kohai
The fact is NO Kyu Grade or Child should be injured purposely by a DAN grade.
In the organisation I train in we practice Ashihara Karate, this is a full contact MA and the Adult DAN grades is a excellent sight to watch sparring.
If we purposely injure a Kyu Grade or a 'Cadet' grade we as DAN grades come under the realm of ‘humility’ delivered by the senior DAN grades and Senior Instructor. I suppose it is quite 'Old School' but it works and the Kyu grades control the pace not the other way around.
Child Abuse - I don't really think so - the students could have dropped to the knees to stop at any time. Therefore stopping the 'body conditioning' immediately
Misguidance - Definitely, If She was given this treatment when she was a child student then it is only what she knows.
This is why we all need to be members of a Governing Body who checks on instructor practices and can dish out 'punishments' in cases like this.
Osu
Posted by: wristtwister
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 06:39 AM
If you "intentionally" kick someone, you can't claim "accidental" damage. The risks of kicking attacks are quite well known, and the instructor simply did something that is not allowed in any training venue I've ever played in during the past 45 years.
"Body conditioning", with controlled punching and kicking, are one thing... but kicking or punching someone to submission... not in this lifetime, unless it's in self-defense. Conditioning is controlled and "within limits".
We'll never know the mindset of the teacher that did this... and she certainly needs to be removed from her job as an instructor. Sadistic treatment of students is more the legend than the rule of martial arts training, and even though sometimes things seem sadistic, most schools and systems understand and control the amount of punishment a student is allowed to endure. "Reaching their limit" isn't one of the answers. When punishment like this is administered, it flows in both directions, so you physically understand what's going on... i.e., If I'm beating you into submission, you must be close to beating me into submission...
Whatever was going on inside her pea-sized brain, she made some unimaginably bad choices that will probably end up with her in jail. It ain't rocket science, folks... it's fighting, and involves two parties... the licenses on the wall allow you to run a business, teach martial arts, and help people learn something that can help them. There's no license to inflict unwarranted injuries on people... JMHO.
Posted by: Dobbersky
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 07:44 AM
Wristtwister-sama
I total agree with you and everyone else in this thread. There is a threshold, which as an instructor, you should not step over. And this instructor has gone the CobraKai way with
‘There is no pain in this dojo!!!!’
‘No Sensei!!!!’
My reason for saying its not or can’t be Child abuse because, the children were all given a ‘choice’ and if like my club, Parents would have been sat at the back therefore if one of them thought it was a bit 'strange' or 'extreme' they would have said something. And if they didn’t, then I ask why didn’t they!!!!
I know that body conditioning is part of training especially 'Old School' but I personally draw the line with 'conditioning' children fullstop. The policies and practices that this Instructor undertook are nowhere close to what all Genuine Instructors teach; I always say exercise is the best conditioner, especially for the younger kids.
I actually don't think there are many Blackbelts that push it as far as you state ‘to the limit’ and beyond. I think that's left to the Cage fighters etc.
Osu
Posted by: shoveldog
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 07:46 AM
All this argument over what constitutes child abuse from various individuals' perspectives is ludicrous. Child abuse is what a state's legislature says it is. Period. Various states define it differently. Some states legislate degrees of culpability, some use the term reckless endangerment, some use other terms; approaches to the issue vary. It's strictly a legal term, defined by the jurisdiction where the act occurs.
In some cases, where the facts are contested, we need a trial so that a judge or a jury can decide what actually happened, but the definition of the crime is determined by the legislature, (or in rare cases, by common law.)
A child can't consent to abuse or neglect. Period.
Voluntary participation is a contact sport doesn't mean you consent to an instructor's negligence or to an intentional tort by the instructor. Period.
Argue about whether this conduct was right or wrong all you want, but arguing about what is or isn't child abuse is pointless.
Posted by: Isshinryukid4life
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 09:28 AM
To my politically correct martial art bro Shovledog-San.
http://www.reference.com/search?q=%20abuse 
Posted by: hedkikr
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 11:43 AM
Seems appropriate that drgn opts-out. It's frustrating to me whenever anyone gets so PC that even making a non-binding opinion on a forum is equated to bias in a courtroom.
Folks, we don't need all the facts before a public opinion is given because the public isn't dispensing punishmnent. The courtroom is the forum for facts & interpretation of the law.
Why fret over labeling? Unless the charges were completely bogus, the instructor deserves to be shunned by her peers & prevented from ever teaching again. There are too many excellent instructors out there that we don't need this woman becoming the face of MA.
I've dealt w/ law-breakers for most of my carreer. It's true - there are no guilty people in jail/prison...just ask them. I've heard my share of excuses, rationalizations & out-right lies during inmate interviews. Sorry, I don't buy the "mistake" arguement...it's either bad judgement, bullying (cruelty), sadism (enjoyment in inflicting pain) or a combination - is there anything else?
Posted by: shoveldog
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 12:50 PM
Okay, so I get carried away. But, I'm really not trying to be politically correct; I couldn't care less about that. It's just that from my perspective, child abuse is a crime, defined by the jurisdiction where the act occurs, so when people throw around that term in a generic sense, I feel compelled to point out that our opinions really don't matter where you've got a legally defined term.
Likewise my comments about consent. Strictly the legal perspective, nothing more. Nothing personal intended towards anyone or anyone's opinion.
Posted by: iaibear
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 03:05 PM
We all have our own person opinion of what took place.
May I take this opportunity to repeat the original quote:
<< Police say 47-year-old Susan Bateman of Hampton was arrested November 20th and charged with one felony count of child endangerment. >>
A felony, yes. One charge, and that one is of child endangerment, NOT abuse.
Please keep the correct terms in mind before rushing to judgment.
Posted by: JAMJTX
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 03:15 PM
<< Police say 47-year-old Susan Bateman of Hampton was arrested November 20th and charged with one felony count of child endangerment. >>
It could have been that they charged her with what they would most likely win a conviction with.
I would like to know how old the other kids in the class were. It was stupid to do this with someone at this age, but as was said earlier, it could have been a good test for an older class.
Posted by: Victor Smith
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 03:53 PM
I don't think quibbling about the legal charge is of value.
I've checked with a medical authority and they raise the issue of the danger of striking the torso of the young.
From a Doctor's point of view it's just too dangerous to do.
Abuse or child endnagerment are just labels and I'm concerned that anyone really wants to yak about words. It's wrong, seriously wrong and that's the issue.
Posted by: shoveldog
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 05:10 PM
Quote:
Abuse or child endnagerment are just labels and I'm concerned that anyone really wants to yak about words.
Not just labels, not just words, but crimes.
But you're right, the issue is wrong or right, which is what I was saying all along. Leave the crime descriptions out of it, that was my point. People throwing around legal terms loosely caught my eye. But I guess by talking about it, I probably made it more of an issue than it was. My bad. Occupational hazard.
Posted by: hedkikr
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/04/07 07:23 PM
Thank You.
Posted by: Ronin1966
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/05/07 11:13 AM
I stand rightly corrected...thank you! The error is clearly mine.
Jeff
Posted by: Dereck
Re: Instructor kicks student 200 times - 12/05/07 11:42 AM
If you were a 11 year old boy in a martial art, would you take up the challenge? Answer this honestly. I would say I would have; for ego, to show off, etc.
It was a stupid challenge and it should never have happened; very poor judgment on the Instructor's part however if she was a "he", this would have been seen probably as far worse and incident.