Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Corporal punishment of children

24

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 128 ✭✭Mary Hairy


    strobe wrote: »
    When you were growing up in this country young girls were being given into what was basically a life of slavery in places like the Magdalene Laundries. Young boys were being raped and beaten to within an inch of their lives in Christian Brothers schools and industrial schools while adults the country over turned a blind eye. The kids took what was done to them and never complained because adults were always in the right and children were always in the wrong and if they disagreed or objected they were beaten with canes purchased in the local post office.

    Forgive us if we don't all look back on the good old days that you grew up in with smiles on our faces and a twinkle in our eyes and pray every day that things could go back to the way they once were.






    Honestly, I just can't even tell if people are being serious or not on this website anymore.

    Young and not so young women went into Magdalene Homes voluntarily. They knew their prescence would not be tolerated in society. Not one resident of a Magdalene home ever brought a habeus corpus application. They went into the Magdalene home for sanctuary, discipline and rehabilitation.
    As for the Industrial Schools, they are an early example of how light touch regulation failed. Most of the inmates were there had committed crimes and the fact that children could be sent away acted as a deterrent to others. The fact that some crimes were allegedly commited by persons in charge does not justify the proposition that children should not be subject to proper discipline and control.
    parents knwe that if they didn't discipline their children properly they would be sent to the nuns and brothers who would do it instead. parents knew that giving a few strokes of the cane at home would save the child from a much more severe regime in an industrial school.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Mary Hairy wrote: »
    Young and not so young women went into Magdalene Homes voluntarily. They knew their prescence would not be tolerated in society. Not one resident of a Magdalene home ever brought a habeus corpus application. They went into the Magdalene home for sanctuary, discipline and rehabilitation.
    As for the Industrial Schools, they are an early example of how light touch regulation failed. Most of the inmates were there had committed crimes and the fact that children could be sent away acted as a deterrent to others. The fact that some crimes were allegedly commited by persons in charge does not justify the proposition that children should not be subject to proper discipline and control.
    parents knwe that if they didn't discipline their children properly they would be sent to the nuns and brothers who would do it instead. parents knew that giving a few strokes of the cane at home would save the child from a much more severe regime in an industrial school.

    I'm speechless. So bring back the laundries in your opinion? I've no interest in discussing this with you any further so. In my opinion society is in a constant state of progression. I believe that things were better 100 years ago than they were 400 years ago, and were better 50 years ago than they were 100 years ago. If you disagree with that then in my opinion you are so completely divorced from reality I would be wasting my time. Have fun treating your children like they are your property.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Great... go back 30-40 years, and talk about the worst offenses? Why not go back 100 years to compare?

    Yes, why not go back 100 years to compare? Or 400 years. Mary was longing for the good old days. Are you really one of these people as well that believes things were so much better back 33 years ago or 100 years ago or 400 years ago? Or did you completely miss the point of both Mary's post and mine?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    To be honest, I think taconnal has won me over. I was on the fence on this issue, thinking that a few smacks here and there weren't that bad, but his/her arguments about children not being in receipt of the same respect adults are, really rang true for me. Corporal punishment doesn't send the best message to a child. If, for example, they are caught fighting with other children, how can you legitimately discipline them by basically repeating what they have been at?

    The best course of action, it would seem, is to be such a parent that physical discipline will never be needed.
    strobe wrote: »
    In my opinion society is in a constant state of progression. I believe that things were better 100 years ago than they were 400 years ago, and were better 50 years ago than they were 100 years ago.

    Well, that isn't universally true: things were better in Greece during the classical era than the dark ages that followed. In places like Africa it's questionable to talk of progress. But in terms of Europe now, that would seem to be the case, if you take certain criteria. (Liberty for the individual is something you can't really say is improving, for example.) It will be interesting, a thousand years down the line, to see if this holds.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭Truley


    Well, that isn't universally true: things were better in Greece during the classical era than the dark ages that followed. In places like Africa it's questionable to talk of progress. But in terms of Europe now, that would seem to be the case, if you take certain criteria. (Liberty for the individual is something you can't really say is improving, for example.) It will be interesting, a thousand years down the line, to see if this holds.

    I agree, human society changes all the time but I don't necessarily think it is progressive. For all the knoweldge and understanding we gain we lose or forget just as much. I think we follow a more cyclical pattern really.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    You're missing the point. Its about discipline. I made the point that this is not just about corporal punishment. Its about parental supervision, and a host of other factors.


    on the suject of parental supervsion. what kind of parents let their 12 year old daughter go out by herself at midnight?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    Goesague wrote: »
    Corporal punishment was abolished in state (free education) schools in 1982. If you are 33 years old canes were not allowed when you were at school. Even raps on the head, clutching of the ear was not allowed. I know two former lay teachers in a Marist school who were charged with assault.


    in the eighties some kids lived in fear and clips were still given. these days teachers live in fear. in some schools it would not be unusual for little johnny to take a swipe at the teacher. he has little to fear, maybe a one day suspension. many teachers would rather get a broken nose than fend off a blow as by trying to defend yourself would be deemed as an assault on the pupil.

    at the moment the worst possible jobs to have must be a tecaher or priest. phyisacl contact of any kind is taboo.a gratulatory pat on the back is a sexual assault, a handsake physical assault, rasing your voice a verbal assault.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,371 ✭✭✭Fuinseog


    [.
    As for the Industrial Schools, they are an early example of how light touch regulation failed. Most of the inmates were there had committed crimes and the fact that children could be sent away acted as a deterrent to others. The fact that some crimes were allegedly commited by persons in charge does not justify the proposition that children should not be subject to proper discipline and control.
    parents knwe that if they didn't discipline their children properly they would be sent to the nuns and brothers who would do it instead. parents knew that giving a few strokes of the cane at home would save the child from a much more severe regime in an industrial school.[/QUOTE]

    in the eighties parents threatened their children with Letterfrack en lieu of hitting them. it may not be PC to say it, but many of those in such schools were gurriers. the difference between then and now is that the gurrier today gets away with a lot more.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,871 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Fuinseog wrote: »
    in the eighties some kids lived in fear and clips were still given. these days teachers live in fear. in some schools it would not be unusual for little johnny to take a swipe at the teacher. he has little to fear, maybe a one day suspension. many teachers would rather get a broken nose than fend off a blow as by trying to defend yourself would be deemed as an assault on the pupil.

    at the moment the worst possible jobs to have must be a tecaher or priest. phyisacl contact of any kind is taboo.a gratulatory pat on the back is a sexual assault, a handsake physical assault, rasing your voice a verbal assault.

    While true, this is nthing to do with the debate at hand as it's more a reult of media overreaction. Also, if you're a teacher and you hit a kid, guarantee you'll be facing a civil case even if the kid is used to phzsical discipline at home.

    If little Johnny takes a swipe at his teacher, I'm willing to guess he learnt it at home.

    Fuinseog wrote: »
    in the eighties parents threatened their children with Letterfrack en lieu of hitting them. it may not be PC to say it, but many of those in such schools were gurriers. the difference between then and now is that the gurrier today gets away with a lot more.

    It might not be PC to say this either, but many of these guerriers are probably used to being struck at home.

    I'm sorry, but your arguement only holds up if you can prove that these kids were NOT subjected to corporal punishment at home and completly collapses if they were.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.





  • Goesague wrote: »
    Corporal punishment was abolished in state (free education) schools in 1982. If you are 33 years old canes were not allowed when you were at school. Even raps on the head, clutching of the ear was not allowed. I know two former lay teachers in a Marist school who were charged with assault.

    There's a big difference between what is made law and what is enforced. As with anything that has gone on for so long, it continued past the point of the law being introduced. As I said, the beatings were gone, it was lesser forms of corporal punishment (which didn't leave marks).
    strobe wrote: »
    I'm speechless. So bring back the laundries in your opinion? I've no interest in discussing this with you any further so. In my opinion society is in a constant state of progression. I believe that things were better 100 years ago than they were 400 years ago, and were better 50 years ago than they were 100 years ago. If you disagree with that then in my opinion you are so completely divorced from reality I would be wasting my time. Have fun treating your children like they are your property.

    That's not what she said and you know it. She said that just because it was taken to extremes in some schools/organisations that the whole method should not be removed. She also said that parents sent their children to these schools because they expected their children to receive a discipline & education that went beyond that of the state schools, not that they expected them to be abused... And the reputation of many of these schools reinforced such a belief. My Mother went to a convent boarding school in Carlow and told me the type of life they had. Harsh, but as she said it, very common to the time. Parents sent their children to school environments similar to what they themselves had received, and believed the discipline received was worth it.

    I never want to go back to those days. I wouldn't have liked to gone to such schools, and neither would I want any children to go to them.
    strobe wrote: »
    Yes, why not go back 100 years to compare? Or 400 years. Mary was longing for the good old days. Are you really one of these people as well that believes things were so much better back 33 years ago or 100 years ago or 400 years ago? Or did you completely miss the point of both Mary's post and mine?

    You've obviously misread what I wrote. I said I would prefer things to go back to when I was in school. The limited form of corporal punishment which we received was enough. I haven't said anything about going back to using canes or such.

    And I did get what you both wrote, but I don't see why the extreme must be used.
    Fuinseog wrote: »
    on the suject of parental supervsion. what kind of parents let their 12 year old daughter go out by herself at midnight?

    Bad ones? I certainly would think so. And I would apply that to any child (male or female) under 16 to be allowed past 10pm.

    Interesting that the age has dropped between postings....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 856 ✭✭✭miec


    Whilst I would agree that there is an increase in social delinquency amongst children and teenagers, I am against smacking / corporeal punishment. I believe it causes more harm than good. When smacking or beating your kids was socially acceptable it was a bad thing but equally the pendulum has swung too far the other way which is equally bad for children, they now have no boundaries.

    Hitting children in my opinion makes them either aggressive, overly passive and fearful, lose their confidence and the pattern repeats itself.

    Children who receive little or no punishment eg: grounding, removal of privileges etc feel unloved, abandoned and insignificant, as well causing anti social behaviour and aggressiveness.

    The key to disciplining children is balance and it has to be age appropriate. It is true you cannot reason with a 2 year old but you don't need to resort to smacking. A parent has to be firm and consistent, their no must mean no. Clear boundaries have to be established, for example if a 2 year old won't eat their food, then remove the plate and give them nothing else until the next meal time.

    If a ten year old gives cheek a parent needs to challenge it and tell them its not acceptable. For instance I would remove privileges such as game time playing or write lines or do chores. What I have learned is consistency, now I wasn't always consistent but when I realised that it worked I became a better parent and my child felt both safer and happier.

    Children will always try to push the boundaries to test if they are safe, it is part of being a kid, it is essential for parents to maintain them. I agree it is wrong for young children to out late at night, I don't allow it. A parent does not need to physically assault their child to get them to behave and to me it should be a crime to do hit or smack your child.

    I think sometimes people get confused with smacking and discipline, they are not the same thing. One is assault, the other is ensuring the safety of the child and society in general.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,871 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    I thinks my parents were too soft on me. After I left home I was in a houseshare. I kept going as I had at home, being messy and so on. One day my flatmates held me down on my bed and beat my bum with a hairbrush for being such a slob. I soon got my act together. My mother always went around picking up after me. When I got mediocre results at school she would say I was great and wasn't school very hard nowadays. If my mother had given me a few spankings for being lazy at school I am sure I would have done much better.

    BDSM forum --->

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭Goesague


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    BDSM forum --->

    Thats the problem with this topic. Anyone who believes in corporal punishment is albelled asa deviant. I had to buy a new cane recently as my eldest daughter will be 14 shortly, and the only place I could buy one was in a sex shop. If anybody who knew me saw me copming or going from the sex shop they would have assumed I was going in for the DVDs or so called "sex toys".


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    To be honest, I think taconnal has won me over. I was on the fence on this issue, thinking that a few smacks here and there weren't that bad, but his/her arguments about children not being in receipt of the same respect adults are, really rang true for me. Corporal punishment doesn't send the best message to a child. If, for example, they are caught fighting with other children, how can you legitimately discipline them by basically repeating what they have been at?

    The best course of action, it would seem, is to be such a parent that physical discipline will never be needed.



    Well, that isn't universally true: things were better in Greece during the classical era than the dark ages that followed. In places like Africa it's questionable to talk of progress. But in terms of Europe now, that would seem to be the case, if you take certain criteria. (Liberty for the individual is something you can't really say is improving, for example.) It will be interesting, a thousand years down the line, to see if this holds.

    I've been on the NYC subway where I've seen kids getting a good wollopping from their mother. I've seen it on meath street too. I don't think violence actually raises polite, kind, decent people. I think if they do end up decent and kind, its despite the beatings, not because of them.

    My father went to a very reputable Irish boarding school. He often said the molestations were better than the beatings. Interesting eh?

    What I have noticed with my own son is this. That if I scold him too hard, ive lost. People like to backseat parent and say why don't you just tell him sternly to "___________' or "___________" when he does x or y, and its usually from people who don't have kids or know nothing about them. He is only three now, but it is the same now as it was at two. If my reaction causes him to cry, whether through severity or tone, he cant hear me. He cant actually hear why what he did was wrong or dangerous and then what was the point? How will he learn.

    As for school - they teachers have no recourse because nothing has been subsituted for the corporal punishment. I had no corporal punishment but there was no fear of students or anything like that.

    And if a teacher ever hit my child, I would quite gladly give him or her a belt right back.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Goesague wrote: »
    Thats the problem with this topic. Anyone who believes in corporal punishment is albelled asa deviant. I had to buy a new cane recently as my eldest daughter will be 14 shortly, and the only place I could buy one was in a sex shop. If anybody who knew me saw me copming or going from the sex shop they would have assumed I was going in for the DVDs or so called "sex toys".

    There is nothing wrong with buying sextoys or porn DvDs.

    I do think those who believe in corporal punishment are deviants, and lack imagination as they think it is the best and only way to discipline children.
    It is lazy parenting

    Goesague you repeatedly posted in the parenting forum about beating your children with a solid can and beating your daughter on the bare soles of her feet as to not to mark her. You are beating and terrifying your children, that is child abuse.

    I consider that a lot more abhorrent then what two consenting adults choose to do to each other.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭Goesague


    Thaedydal wrote: »

    Goesague you repeatedly posted in the parenting forum about beating your children with a solid can and beating your daughter on the bare soles of her feet as to not to mark her.

    No, I did not. I have never beaten my daughter on the bare soles of her feet.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,397 ✭✭✭RedXIV


    If my reaction causes him to cry, whether through severity or tone, he cant hear me. He cant actually hear why what he did was wrong or dangerous and then what was the point? How will he learn.

    Same way as most normal people learn, nobody likes to be shouted out so you don't do what caused people to shout again. This is a very simple and effective lesson.

    And if a teacher ever hit my child, I would quite gladly give him or her a belt right back.

    And how is this not teaching your child about violence?

    Thaedydal wrote: »
    I do think those who believe in corporal punishment are deviants, and lack imagination as they think it is the best and only way to discipline children.
    It is lazy parenting

    Usually I agree with you on most things but I genuinely think that children are better behaved when they get the odd smack for intolerable behaviour. I don't believe with Goesague's extremes, but I do think the shock of a child getting physically reprimanded will fully reinforce the lesson. As I stated on another post, when we were asked in a classroom one day who got smacked as a child, myself a only a few others raised their hands. And we were the good kids, the ones who did what they were told and were respectful. the rest of the class didn't and a good percentage of them would not have been as respectful as young RedXIV ;)

    I'd like to reiterate again my previous post that just because you don't agree with the concept does it make my parents who did, bad parents, lazy parents or "deviants". I honestly can't fault their parenting and I do feel privileged with the childhood I received in their care




  • Thaedydal wrote: »
    I do think those who believe in corporal punishment are deviants, and lack imagination as they think it is the best and only way to discipline children. It is lazy parenting

    And if they believe in other forms to work in conjunction with the corporal punishment?

    Also I have to wonder why posts like this lump all advocates of corporal punishment into the same category... I don't have any approval of Goesague's form of corporal punishment. Its too much. But I do believe in a small amount depending on the situation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    there is a difference in physical chastisement, ie a slap on the hand or bum when they are under 5, the lashing out in anger and hitting a child and ritual corporal punishment in which
    The submits to be beaten with a hand or implement.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,397 ✭✭✭RedXIV


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    there is a difference in physical chastisement, ie a slap on the hand or bum when they are under 5, the lashing out in anger and hitting a child and ritual corporal punishment in which
    The submits to be beaten with a hand or implement.

    I don't think anyone is disputing the differences. I wouldn't condone an actual beating of a child, instead we are talking about the idea of a slap on the wrist/bottom to amplify a point


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    This thread is not entitled slapping a child.

    Corperal punishement ranges from, slappping, hitting, punching, kicking, using belts, slippers, canes, rope or any other implement to use pain to change someone behaviour.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭Goesague


    There's a big difference between what is made law and what is enforced. As with anything that has gone on for so long, it continued past the point of the law being introduced. As I said, the beatings were gone, it was lesser forms of corporal punishment (which didn't leave marks).

    ..

    Nonsense. So after the law abolishing hanging was enacted, they had a few more hangings anyway just for the hell of it?

    A person is caught drink driving and they say "well under the law a few years ago I would have been under the limit" and the guard says "You have me there".

    The Marist Brothers were well able to leave marks. They also had a technique of striking the hand with the cane on the way down and the back of the hand on the way up. I never heard of any other order doing that. One Marist Brother held a puil out of a sixth floor window by his ankles on one occasion.

    Hanging out the window does not leave marks but you can bet that after the law changed all beating had to stop, whther it left marks or not.




  • Goesague wrote: »
    Nonsense. So after the law abolishing hanging was enacted, they had a few more hangings anyway just for the hell of it?

    You're comparing corporal punishment to hanging someone?
    A person is caught drink driving and they say "well under the law a few years ago I would have been under the limit" and the guard says "You have me there".

    Drink driving still exists in this country. If they're not reported or caught, they continue to do so.
    The Marist Brothers were well able to leave marks. They also had a technique of striking the hand with the cane on the way down and the back of the hand on the way up. I never heard of any other order doing that. One Marist Brother held a puil out of a sixth floor window by his ankles on one occasion.

    Hanging out the window does not leave marks but you can bet that after the law changed all beating had to stop, whther it left marks or not.

    And rapping their knuckles on the top of the skull is quite uncomfortable for a small boy, and doesn't leave any marks either... whats your point? It's interesting you continue to go to extremes in your examples.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭Goesague


    You're comparing corporal punishment to hanging someone?

    So You can read. When apunishment is abolished, it ceases whether it is Capital or Corporal.



    Drink driving still exists in this country. If they're not reported or caught, they continue to do so.
    [/QUOTE]

    It is legal to drink and drive in case you hadn't known. It is illegal to have alcohol above a certain limit in the blood within three hours of driving. The limit has gone down a number of times. When it goes down the guards enforce the new limit a minute later. If the limit goes down at midnight tonight the guards will enforce it immediately. If you are caught at ten minutes past midnight over the new limit but below the old, tough luck.


    And rapping their knuckles on the top of the skull is quite uncomfortable for a small boy, and doesn't leave any marks either... whats your point? It's interesting you continue to go to extremes in your examples.

    If a small boy has his skull rapped he can go to the guards and his parents can bring him to their solicitor. The school and whoever rapped his skull will be in big trouble. The fact that there is no mark is irrelevant. If a child is assaulted in school there are always loads of witnesses.
    Complaining about my examples is just an attempt to cover up for the fact that you were caught bluffing. I am not fooled.




  • Goesague wrote: »
    So You can read.

    Seriously, why bother be insulting?
    When apunishment is abolished, it ceases whether it is Capital or Corporal.

    How so? Corporal being about the body. If the punishment is applied to the body, then it is still going to be corporal punishment. Or perhaps I misunderstand the term?
    It is legal to drink and drive in case you hadn't known. It is illegal to have alcohol above a certain limit in the blood within three hours of driving. The limit has gone down a number of times. When it goes down the guards enforce the new limit a minute later. If the limit goes down at midnight tonight the guards will enforce it immediately. If you are caught at ten minutes past midnight over the new limit but below the old, tough luck.

    Very nice, but you haven't added anything new. Drink driving still occurs in this country. The individuals involved continue until they are caught or reported. Anything new to add?
    If a small boy has his skull rapped he can go to the guards and his parents can bring him to their solicitor. The school and whoever rapped his skull will be in big trouble. The fact that there is no mark is irrelevant. If a child is assaulted in school there are always loads of witnesses.

    When I was in school, there was no concerted effort to get students to complain of such behavior to either their parents or the authorities. This has changed. Students know that they're not to be hit, and make use of it. It was very different 20 years ago.
    Complaining about my examples is just an attempt to cover up for the fact that you were caught bluffing.

    How was I caught bluffing? I said that some forms of corporal punishment continued past the outlawing of it. You supplied some rather extreme examples, whereas I mentioned an example similar to the rapping of knuckles on the head. Something I myself received.

    You have not posted anything which shows that I am mistaken.
    I am not fooled.

    Really? :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,871 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with buying sextoys or porn DvDs.

    I do think those who believe in corporal punishment are deviants, and lack imagination as they think it is the best and only way to discipline children.
    It is lazy parenting

    Goesague you repeatedly posted in the parenting forum about beating your children with a solid can and beating your daughter on the bare soles of her feet as to not to mark her. You are beating and terrifying your children, that is child abuse.

    I consider that a lot more abhorrent then what two consenting adults choose to do to each other.

    This sounds vaguely familar to someone who got banned a while back in the parenting forum. Kossomething. You sure it's not a rereg?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,960 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    This thread is not entitled slapping a child.

    Corperal punishement ranges from, slappping, hitting, punching, kicking, using belts, slippers, canes, rope or any other implement to use pain to change someone behaviour.

    The problem is that many people (myself included) do not consider slapping a child to be the same as beating a child. They are totally different mindsets IMO and should not be considered as the same topic.
    If you do consider a smack on the bum as "corporal punishment" then I think you open the door to having to consider "the naughty spot" as isolation and deprivation treatment.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,128 ✭✭✭cynder


    Goesague wrote: »
    No, I did not. I have never beaten my daughter on the bare soles of her feet.


    My uncle used to do that to his eldest son.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭Goesague


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    This sounds vaguely familar to someone who got banned a while back in the parenting forum. Kossomething. You sure it's not a rereg?

    What is this? I never posted any such thing and an attemp is being made to say that I did.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭Goesague


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    This sounds vaguely familar to someone who got banned a while back in the parenting forum. Kossomething. You sure it's not a rereg?

    What is this? I never posted any such thing and an attempt is being made to say that I did.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement