I don’t think that harming babies because you’re frustrated is an excuse, whether it’s shaking, beating or whatever. I agree with you that there shouldn’t be a distinction in law and definitely agree that new parents need less anxiety foisted on them. As others in this discussion have pointed out, there is a huge implicit expectation in our culture for parents to have zero limit to their patience. Combine that with the suggestion that you might randomly flip out and kill your baby and you have a recipe for yet more anxiety, if not disaster. Letting people know that it’s OK to just leave the situation for a few minutes to calm down recognises parents limits and offers a release valve to parents who have been told that there shouldn’t be one. It won’t make a difference to anyone who is simply cruel or falsely accused of child abuse but that’s not who the original comment was addressed to.
I think a combination of reasonable laws/justice and reinforcement of common sense for new parents would be really good.
I understand the comment comes from a good, conscientious place, but from context it’s clearly talking about the shaken baby thing, which I think is misinformation that originated in a moral panic and has never really been demonstrated to be a thing.
And I agree that frustration absolutely isn’t an excuse but that’s really my point, I think you need to have something deeply wrong with you to shake a baby in the way that “shaken baby” actually means. Like as a new parent I remember seeing a demonstration by a nurse on this topic, and the way she shook that doll’s body was obviously intended to be shocking, but it’s not something you do just because you’re frustrated. It’s clearly violent. Like, I can confidently say I don’t think anybody in that room needed that demonstrated any more than they needed to be told, “Remember, don’t repeatedly punch your own baby in the face.” If you’re gonna do that then no amount of warning will change it I don’t think.
I don’t think that harming babies because you’re frustrated is an excuse, whether it’s shaking, beating or whatever. I agree with you that there shouldn’t be a distinction in law and definitely agree that new parents need less anxiety foisted on them. As others in this discussion have pointed out, there is a huge implicit expectation in our culture for parents to have zero limit to their patience. Combine that with the suggestion that you might randomly flip out and kill your baby and you have a recipe for yet more anxiety, if not disaster. Letting people know that it’s OK to just leave the situation for a few minutes to calm down recognises parents limits and offers a release valve to parents who have been told that there shouldn’t be one. It won’t make a difference to anyone who is simply cruel or falsely accused of child abuse but that’s not who the original comment was addressed to.
I think a combination of reasonable laws/justice and reinforcement of common sense for new parents would be really good.
I understand the comment comes from a good, conscientious place, but from context it’s clearly talking about the shaken baby thing, which I think is misinformation that originated in a moral panic and has never really been demonstrated to be a thing.
And I agree that frustration absolutely isn’t an excuse but that’s really my point, I think you need to have something deeply wrong with you to shake a baby in the way that “shaken baby” actually means. Like as a new parent I remember seeing a demonstration by a nurse on this topic, and the way she shook that doll’s body was obviously intended to be shocking, but it’s not something you do just because you’re frustrated. It’s clearly violent. Like, I can confidently say I don’t think anybody in that room needed that demonstrated any more than they needed to be told, “Remember, don’t repeatedly punch your own baby in the face.” If you’re gonna do that then no amount of warning will change it I don’t think.