1. Children are not cattle, and even the most damaged children have been shown to respond to positive attention. Cattle don't appear to have brains that would respond to this. And for the recond, I actually think that a deep trough around the edge of the field that is too steep to climb out of on the 'wrong' side is a better solution to keeping cattle in one place, perhaps topped by a wall at the top of the slope. That's a different discussion altogether though.
2. It's difficult to tell from the article what the real reason for the pupil's request to go on the system is, other than what it says: "Other students actually ask to be wired up, say staff members, because..." It's difficult to tell. The article gives the opinions of staff members as fact. Basic psycology would suggest that the other students want the apparent happiness and the rewards for good behaviour and link that with the backpack.
3. I never said that the electric shock was causing deaths. However is has been shown to cause brain damage, which is very difficult to measure and is a very gradual process. It might be no more apparent than being able to tell when someone you know has consumed a pint of alcohol. He still acts the same on the surface but some of his brain functiuons are adversely affected. It's comparable to that.
4. I severely doubt that none of the children on this program would respond as well, or better, to a kinder program. I severely doubt that this type of program becoming 'acceptable' will not result in a slippery slope that punishes lesser behaviours, in fact it appears to have started already judging by some of the comments in the article. (Shocks for swearing? FFS!) I can't help feeling that '"Little Johnny is much happier now," could easily be translated as, "Little Johnny is much easier to control now," which isn't necessarily the same thing.
Overall, my distaste at this method of control is unchanged, and I'd be horrified to see it become something that is accepted as a recommended treatment.
no subject
2. It's difficult to tell from the article what the real reason for the pupil's request to go on the system is, other than what it says: "Other students actually ask to be wired up, say staff members, because..."
It's difficult to tell. The article gives the opinions of staff members as fact. Basic psycology would suggest that the other students want the apparent happiness and the rewards for good behaviour and link that with the backpack.
3. I never said that the electric shock was causing deaths. However is has been shown to cause brain damage, which is very difficult to measure and is a very gradual process. It might be no more apparent than being able to tell when someone you know has consumed a pint of alcohol. He still acts the same on the surface but some of his brain functiuons are adversely affected. It's comparable to that.
4. I severely doubt that none of the children on this program would respond as well, or better, to a kinder program. I severely doubt that this type of program becoming 'acceptable' will not result in a slippery slope that punishes lesser behaviours, in fact it appears to have started already judging by some of the comments in the article. (Shocks for swearing? FFS!) I can't help feeling that '"Little Johnny is much happier now," could easily be translated as, "Little Johnny is much easier to control now," which isn't necessarily the same thing.
Overall, my distaste at this method of control is unchanged, and I'd be horrified to see it become something that is accepted as a recommended treatment.