# Twickster, you're full of it. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 9, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086 "2010-11-09T20:22:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/101 "2010-11-09T23:55:44Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > I have a hard time believing _in loco parentis_ extends to striking a child. In what way does that promote or safeguard the welfare of the child? In exactly the same way the striking advances the welfare of the child when a parent does it for disciplinary reasons. That having been said, extending _in loco parentis_ to a live-in boyfriend is not a matter of settled law. Probably 95% of caselaw involving the doctrine have to do with daycare or schools taking on the role of parent for the time the child is in their care during the day/schoolday. I am not aware of any cases where the question was settled as to if a babysitter/nanny has this authority. It might be, it might not, depends on the case. It would definitely be within the boyfriend’s authority if they were married at common law. However, most common-law marriage states have a requirement that the couple presents themselves as married within their social circle. If they’re common-law married then the boyfriend is a step-father and has all the rights and privileges of a parent. If not, then it’s a question of if the duty imparted by the mother when she left him with the child grants the _in loco parentis_ status. Since she left him with her kid, who he lives with full time, and his other kids(of which he has partial custody) a reasonable assumption was that he would care for them all as if they were siblings and he were their parent. A parent using corporal punishment on fighting siblings wouldn’t even trigger a criminal statute in any state that I’m aware of. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2010, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/102 "2010-11-09T23:59:56Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I don’t lust for it. 9 times out of 10 I honestly don’t expect my posts to amount to anything. My opinions may be strong, but whose aren’t around here? The literal parsing of every word I post gets annoying too. I’m hyperbolic and emphatic, and people jump on that like it mans someything. If I say “everybody likes ice cream,” I get 50 posts from people saying they HATE ice cream and how dare I say everybody likes it. I’m not looking for this shit, it just happens. Do you really need someone to tell you that presenting opinions as facts doesn’t go over well here? You’re not a stupid guy - why are you having such a hard time getting this? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/103 "2010-11-10T00:06:56Z")
> [@Lord\_Ashtar](#): > > I am impressed by your ability to deftly move the goalposts. What goalposts did I move? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/104 "2010-11-10T00:08:21Z")
> [@twickster](#): > > So I was full of shit, but now I’m scared shitless? 😕 I was being sarcastic. **Furt** said you were “intimidated” by me. I find that preposterous. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/105 "2010-11-10T00:09:53Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Yeah–Dio’s internet tough-guy act scared the shit out of you. So you were full of shit, his “facts” scared you so you shit your pants and now you’re shitless. See? It all ties together. Why don’t you try folloing the bouncing ball. I’m not the one who said she was scared, I was rolling my eyes at the suggestion. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/106 "2010-11-10T00:11:19Z")
> [@Library\_Boy](#): > > Most of them, by state laws. > > Many schools have their own policy about parent consent, but few states that still allow CP require parental consent. > My post is my cite. So is this. [CORPORAL PUNISHMENT: US LEGISLATION - SCHOOLS](http://www.corpun.com/usscr1.htm) Ok, I stand corrected. I’m still not convinced it means a parent can’t deny permission for a babysitter to hit her kids, though. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/107 "2010-11-10T00:29:44Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Ok, I stand corrected. I’m still not convinced it means a parent can’t deny permission for a babysitter to hit her kids, though. Fine, you’re not convinced. Your _opinion_ is that a parent can’t deny permission for a babysitter to hit her kids, but… STOP repeating it as a fact. This is your downfall in every case. You said earlier that > [@](#): > > If I say “everybody likes ice cream,” I get 50 posts from people saying they HATE ice cream and how dare I say everybody likes it. That’s not what happens. What you do is enter a thread about desert and state something along the lines of “It’s an absolute fact that ice cream is the only good desert”. Then you continue to repeat this “fact” over and over and over and over again, even though IT IS JUST YOUR OPINION. You restate your “fact” again and again and again and again, and then you repeat it beligerantly. Then you scream your “fact” that ice cream is the only good desert. Then you repeat it again and again and again and again. Then you complain that everyone is picking on you. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/108 "2010-11-10T00:37:06Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Fine, you’re not convinced. Your _opinion_ is that a parent can’t deny permission for a babysitter to hit her kids, > > but… STOP repeating it as a fact. > > This is your downfall in every case. You said earlier that > > > [@](#): > > > > If I say “everybody likes ice cream,” I get 50 posts from people saying they HATE ice cream and how dare I say everybody likes it. > > That’s not what happens. What you do is enter a thread about desert and state something along the lines of “It’s an absolute fact that ice cream is the only good desert”. Then you continue to repeat this “fact” over and over and over and over again, even though IT IS JUST YOUR OPINION. > > You restate your “fact” again and again and again and again, and then you repeat it beligerantly. Then you scream your “fact” that ice cream is the only good desert. Then you repeat it again and again and again and again. > > Then you complain that everyone is picking on you. You left off the part where he says he’s never met anyone who doesn’t like ice cream so they can’t possibly exist. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/109 "2010-11-10T00:43:38Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Wrong. Every word of that is factually correct. It is not legal to spank somebody else’s kid without their permission. That was certainly the law when I was a teacher. Great. Then cite that law, and we can discuss it. My statement is a general one, relying on the general principles of common law. There may be a state which has the law you mention, and may even not limit it to teachers, but apply it to all persons in loco parentis. So – what’s that law? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/110 "2010-11-10T00:48:22Z")
> [@leander](#): > > Sorry, I dislike Dio’s posting style as much as the next person, but this is really poor logic. You did a “brief search”, couldn’t find anything, so you drew absolute conclusions based on a legal precedent in schools in states that allow corporal punishment? No. I drew a conclusion based upon common law. Typically, a state starts with common law and adds to it (or abrogates it) by statute and caselaw. I didn’t draw any absolute conclusion; I refuted Diogenes’ absolute conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/111 "2010-11-10T00:58:00Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What goalposts did I move? The topic was originally whether someone could leave their kid with a boyfriend and if said boyfriend was then allowed to physically reprimand the kid. Now it’s about whether or not corporal punishment is allowed in schools and, if so, in which states. Well done. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/112 "2010-11-10T01:07:41Z")
I posted a question about this thread in another [ATMB thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=584997). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/113 "2010-11-10T01:10:54Z")
> [@Library\_Boy](#): > > Most of them, by state laws. > > Many schools have their own policy about parent consent, but few states that still allow CP require parental consent. > My post is my cite. So is this. [CORPORAL PUNISHMENT: US LEGISLATION - SCHOOLS](http://www.corpun.com/usscr1.htm) > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Ok, I stand corrected. I’m still not convinced it means a parent can’t deny permission for a babysitter to hit her kids, though. I don’t knopw about a babysitter, but in the case of a full-time person in the home who is not the parent, in your own state of Minnesota, the state supreme court adopts a view concerning _in loco parentis_ that doesn’t quite agree with yours. A person who stands _in loco parentis_ to a child is immune from negligence – to say nothing of criminal charges – for acts arising from his exercising parental authority. In _London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Smith_, 64 NW 2d 781 (1954), the Minnesota supremes said: > [@](#): > > Immunity is accorded the parent, not because he is a parent, but because, as a parent, he pursues a course within his household which society exacts of him and which is beneficial to the state. Society expects parents to keep the home in order, to preserve within it domestic tranquility, to see to it that the children go to school and that they deport themselves properly in the neighborhood. The parental non-liability is not granted as a reward, but as a means of enabling the parents to discharge the duties which society exacts. (Quoting _Cowgill v. Boock_, 189 Ore. 282, 305, 218 P. (2d) 445, 455, 19 A.L.R. (2d) 405 (Rossman, concurring). > . > . > . > We therefore hold that the rule which bars an unemancipated minor from maintaining an ordinary negligence action against his parent for damages for personal injuries applies to a stepparent who stands in loco parentis to a minor child. > . > . > . > Whether a stepparent stands in loco parentis to a minor child is primarily a question of intent to be determined in the light of the circumstances peculiar to each case. . . . In the case at bar all the facts indicate that defendant actually stood in loco parentis to his stepson, Douglas Stoffels. What facts established the status? > [@](#): > > Ever since said marriage and up until the time of the accident, nearly three and one-half years later, defendant has provided Douglas with a home, food, clothing, spending money, schooling, and parental guidance and companionship in the same manner and to the same extent as for his natural children. In short, although no adoption has taken place, defendant has treated Douglas as a father would his own child and has given him complete care. Apart from your own deeply held convictions, can you point to any actual law, case, or other authority to support anything you’re saying? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/114 "2010-11-10T01:13:09Z")
> [@Lord\_Ashtar](#): > > The topic was originally whether someone could leave their kid with a boyfriend and if said boyfriend was then allowed to physically reprimand the kid. Now it’s about whether or not corporal punishment is allowed in schools and, if so, in which states. The issue was whether a parent could deny permission to spank to a non-parent., and I’m still not convinced that the laws in some states regarding schools transfer over to give boyfriends the right to spank their girlfriends’ kids against their will. It is certainly classless to tell a mother that she has no right to be angry about it and that the boyfriend gets to make all the rules regardless of what she wants. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/115 "2010-11-10T01:16:13Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The issue was whether a parent could deny permission to spank to a non-parent., and I’m still not convinced that the laws in some states regarding schools transfer over to give boyfriends the right to spank their girlfriends’ kids against their will. I doubt any law affirmatively grants that right. But at common law, I’m fairly confident that a live-in boyfriend who customarily is permitted and expected to watch the child cannot face either criminal or civil liability for spanking the child even if the mother told him not to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/116 "2010-11-10T01:18:55Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I doubt any law affirmatively grants that right. > > But at common law, I’m fairly confident that a live-in boyfriend who customarily is permitted and expected to watch the child cannot face either criminal or civil liability for spanking the child even if the mother told him not to do it. I never said he would face any charges. I’m saying it’s not a right. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/117 "2010-11-10T01:23:59Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It is certainly classless to tell a mother that she has no right to be angry about it and that the boyfriend gets to make all the rules regardless of what she wants. That would be classless, if anyone had said that, which no one did. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/118 "2010-11-10T01:26:45Z")
BTW, since I’ve said some mean things about her, I want to point out that I believe that twickster’s only failing in the thread in question was in being too _nice_. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/119 "2010-11-10T01:26:49Z")
The hell they didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2010, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086/120 "2010-11-10T01:31:16Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I never said he would face any charges. I’m saying it’s not a right. What’s a “right?” In this case, he can do it, and cannot be stopped from doing it except by the mother’s future decision to not leave the child in his care. The only legal way she can stop him is by no longer using his child care services. Her command to him to not spank is legally ineffective. Is that what you meant? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/twickster-youre-full-of-it/560086.md?page=7)