Yesterday, Maggie Atkinson, the Children’s Commissioner, made a statement to the Independent that smacking should be illegal and today, Channel 4 has decided to host a debate on the moral, social and political issues surrounding the topic of smacking children. You can get involved right now on Twitter – just tweet @Channel4News and use the hash tag #C4News.
Our views on smacking are very clear. We don’t condone physical assault of any kind amongst adults and to do so where children are concerned is not only horribly confusing for children but is deeply contradictory. And as no situation actually demands physical punishment, we consider it totally unnecessary and as the scientific data shows clearly, hugely detrimental to some children’s development.
However, we are concerned with the possibility that a ban on smacking may lead to imprisonment. Quite how the currently hypothetical process of disciplining parents who smack their children might work is not yet clear, but given that this is a sensitive area with often little or no adequate support or examination of each individual case, it could open up a flood gate of unjustified forced adoptions.
Dr Atkinson is not going to be actively pursuing a ban on smacking for the time being, but the debate is sure to bring different perspectives to the table.
Previous articles on smacking from our blog can be found below:
November 2013
February 2013 :
- Chris Grayling advocates smacking children
- Charities’ responses to Grayling’s remarks on smacking
- Our petitions on smacking
January 2012
Big thank you to Rapella, polymath extraordinaire, for alerting us to this debate.
Researching Reform 
Sometimes the pendulum swings too far.From Cromwell to merry England and then back again to Victorian England and then to the swinging sixties! Gays were thrown into prison when I anyone insulting them is arrested !
Similarly from “spare the rod and spoil the boy ” the pendulum has swung too far again and there is now a movement to outlaw all forms of smacking;
We are supposed to be multicultural and surely that should mean tolerance of minorities; not only gays,and blacks but of some people who think smacking children is good in certain circumstances especially as those are probably a majority not a minority if the truth be known, though I am not one of them.
The eagerness of fanatics to impose their will on others has always been a curse in our world and no more so than in attitudes to family life.Smacking is wrong but “one strike and you are out” is applied by social services who take children for a single offence by parents but ignore cries for help from children in care who are abused daily but rarely believed.
Asian families often share one large bed,that is their culture but not our’s;Smacking kids in many African countries is the only form of discipline that is current; Be tolerant please!
Surely a bi
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, Forced Adoption. May I ask: in some cultures, children are mutilated and killed because they are deemed to be possessed – should we be tolerant of that too?
This is not a cultural issue. This is one of understanding.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on wakemanclare and commented:
you dont need to smack a child to put displine down theres time out ..theres coming down to your childs level and talk to them at there level and explain what they have done wrong and give them 3 chances not for them to do it again ..or take a toy off them they like for a day and more but to smack a child is so insulting and humiliating
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, Clare. We feel the same way.
LikeLike
An when the child dies due to the negligence of their parents in “giving them 3 chances” to stop running into the street will the parents be charged with their child’s death?
Sorry but it is naive and dangerous to “come down to the child’s level and talk to them”. Children are not “little adults”, they do not have the mental capacity and maturity to make proper choices given the same information an adult has. There are certain circumstances when the only way to get the child’s attention and ensure they clearly associate negative and dangerous behavior with pain is to give them a gentle but firm swat. No one advocates abuse but it’s quite ridiculous to equate a single smack with abuse.
LikeLike
Hi RP, thank you for your comment. Perhaps much depends on the child’s maturity and stage of development, whether or not they understand what is being said, and of course how it is being said.
LikeLike
Aren’t we getting a bit ‘precious’?
I can only go on my own experiences as a child. I was smacked a lot. I don’t feel I have been ‘violated’ or in any way damaged, mentally or physically, by my experiences. It’s true that animals can’t talk (though they can communicate) but most animals chastise their offspring by some form of physical punishment. It seems to me to be a natural form of chastisement. I was very small, my mother was very tall – so she picked me up by my hair on occasion in order to smack my legs! I infuriated my father so much when I was a teenager that he hit me so hard that I was catapulted over the sofa. I was caned a couple of times at school. In infants school, we all had board rubbers thrown at us, slippers were used on our backsides, sticks of chalk hurled towards us – I got adept at dodging these missiles so the innocent kid behind me got it. We all survived it and all my contemporaries have become well-balanced, humane individuals. We look back at those days in the fifties and sixties with great pleasure and amusement. Indeed, I’ve heard it said that the year I was born in – 1948 – was the best year of all time in which to be born, and who am I to argue with that? Almost all the kids born in that year will have suffered quite a lot of physical punishment, either at home or at school, or both.
Our parents had gone through the Second World War either as combatants or as youngsters, suffering deprivation, hunger, fear, and loss such as we never knew. We had the new (and superb, generally) NHS, free schooling and school milk, holidays, security, mobility, and increasing material wealth and freedom of thought and expression. Those who went to University had a grant to do so, not a debt. What was a smack or two compared with that?
I don’t advocate corporal punishment. It hurt, sometimes quite a lot. But I do think that we are losing our perspective and making things criminal that really aren’t that important in the overall scheme of things. Nothing hurt me more than losing my only child through the Family Court system. Still, increasingly even, we have children torn apart from their birth parents for no good reason, still we have paedophiles seemingly immune to prosecution in positions of power, we have violence on our streets and an amoral attitude to society such as we never knew. And this, largely, has happened since corporal punishment started to be frowned on! My generation had a strong sense of right and wrong, of the importance of family, and I believe that these positive attributes outweighed the negative side. If we transgressed, we would get a belt – we knew that. So, mostly, we avoided transgression, or in my case avoided getting caught if I did transgress!
I don’t wish to rubbish any argument against smacking. It’s just that there seem to me to be so many more important wrongs that should be righted first, wrongs that damage our society far more and for far longer.
Roger.
PS Happy New Year to all!
LikeLike
Hi Roger, thank you for your very interesting comment. It is fascinating how life experience shapes our views on things; we are all impacted that way.
LikeLike
Ah – this puts my spin on the baby boomers into perspective. 🙂
I remember my Grandfather who was a war veteran and was torpedoed twice in the second World War and he was a bare knuckle boxer in the days of the underground gambling world. Were it down to him – to teach me in my formative years then I might have had a different approach. However, my Grandmother was the one who was my matriarchal guidance and she was tough but gentle and always lead me with a firm few words.
In our society today – we tend to offer praise over discipline and the thought of “smacking a child” is enough to send someone into over-drive and go as far as setting up a group.
I so understand your point Roger, as this is what I heard from my father who was born in 1946.
However, while I am against physical admonishment – I certainly am not of the mind that a swat on the backside should be a criminal offence. Just because I have never done it – doesn’t mean that I would condemn a parent for doing so.
LikeLike
I’ve been in bother over this debate previously on forums. However, as people here are sensible and open to intelligent discussion, I’ll break my own rules on never discussing this in public.
Having thought about this for many years and I’m old enough to remember when the cane was used in schools and coming from a “spare the rod spoil the child” environment I was beaten and yes, I mean beaten as a child once by my father.
As an adult, I can still remember the feeling of fear and resentment I held. By today’s standards, my father would have been on a charge, in the 70’s this was considered to be “nobody else’s business”
Any person who is not devoid of intelligence knows that it is not acceptable to hit a child or an adult for that matter. People who are happy and content with life don’t go around hitting children or adults. I’ve never raised a hand to my children and have never had to stop myself from doing so when they were younger. I’ve worked with children when I was overseas, teenagers from the age of 13-18 and as testing as they were, reasoned speaking and support in guidance has always worked for me.
The law. My knowledge on the law is that of a layperson. I do know there are current laws in place for that of leaving a bruise on a child and is considered child abuse. A smack of course can bruise or leave a mark. But to bring in a further law to criminalise parents is not as simple as it appears on the surface. I can see many people thinking this a great idea – however, how would this be policed? Who would make the initial complaint? I’m wary about creating a law in a system that is very much a bit of a bloody mess right now.
As for culture – well. We could discuss this till we are all blue in the face. It’s acceptable in some countries to stone a woman to death. Yet this is not our culture. We are horrified when child brides are injured because of sexual intercourse, yet this is the culture of many countries – the British culture has changed immensely over the years and I have seen it as the next generation down from the baby boomers who have seen the biggest cultural change in modern times. It is only just over 30 years since it was acceptable to use the cane in schools – to a parent in their thirties, they will not remember this. They will not remember when it was okay for a child to be lashed across the palm in front of a whole school. It was very much our culture just three decades ago. Voting on a law is always going to divide opinion – many are still around who dished out physical discipline and there are many who are used to the modern world we live in in that it is unacceptable to smack a child and are very liberal about “punishment” So the debate is going to be heated and opposing opinions on the matter are going to be heard.
The debate poses a simple question – Should smacking children be illegal? And right now, this would cause me great concern over how this would be handled and how it would be implemented. It’s a criminal law issue and sentencing guidelines would have to be implemented. I don’t think this is going to become a crime any time soon.
Natasha? A pleasure as always.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, Tracey. The Child Maltreatment Bill, which is a Private Members’ Bill backed by Action for Children seeks to make emotional harm a criminal offence, punishable by fines and/ or imprisonment. As it is a Private Bill, it is unlikely to make it through to the end, however, it does have some traction and is currently going through Parliament. Smacking could be viewed as emotional abuse, as well as a physical breach, and under this Bill parents could well face jail for smacking their child. I have written about the stupidity of jailing most parents often but this recent piece sums it up, somewhat briefly.
LikeLike
Thanks for your clarity there, Natasha. Now I feel clearer on what I am talking about.
Wow – facing jail for smacking children? I do know in Austria it is illegal, I lived there for six years, however, it is rare a case makes it to court. I shall take a look at your link.
LikeLike
Hi Tracey,
I’m not sure how the Bill would work in practice, but certainly hypothetically, if a child were to appear traumatised or, post examination, exhibit signs of mental ill health as a result of repeated/ periodic smacking, one could imagine that the Bill, if enacted, could jail parents for their part in the abuse.
LikeLike
True killing or mutillating children because they are said to be possessed is or certainly was current in some cultures and sending jews to die in gas chambers was current in another culture (if you can call it that)but these are extreme cases resulting in mutilation or death.A smack on the bum is not in that category.An empty fridge,a ragged dress,a cluttered but not unhygenic house,a few absences from school,a few missed pre natal appointments to see midwives or psychobabblers,or the ultimate sin “failure to engage with professionals” are all insufficient reasons to take a baby and then send it and its siblings into care and adoption.No more is a smack even if it does leave a bruise (which would be the only thing to maker it illegal).Police and social workers still refuse to believe or take statements from parents or children in care who have been savagely beaten up or sexually abused.”That’s a life choice ” they say to those who persist except of course that baby p and Daniel Pelka made no such choice………………And we still grumble about a parent who gives a kid a smack on the bum !
LikeLike
Then perhaps we should relax our laws on assault for adults? A woman who is bruised in the face by a man hitting her, or a man who receives a scratch on his cheek from a woman, really shouldn’t make a fuss?
LikeLike
Natasha,I can think of nobody who actively supports men hitting women or women scratching men so there is no minority in uk offended by laws preventing this.The number of parents who believe it is ok to occasionally smack their kids is either a huge minority or possibly even a majority so we should be tolerant of them .
LikeLike
Hi FA, in that case, perhaps the Germans were right to extinguish the Jews. If Majority Rule is always right, then it would certainly follow that some of the most barbaric genocidal wars were justified, on your overriding principle alone.
LikeLike
Well, this debate will run and run. . . .but, as one who was smacked, I can’t possibly relate it to the barbarity of the German death camps. Certainly the majority view is not always right, influenced as it often is by political correctness and propaganda, but it often is. Smacking never left me confused either – I knew I’d done wrong! In some ways, it was better than endlessly being lectured on WHY I’d done wrong – once smacked, quickly forgotten. It usually hurt my pride more than my backside!
I imagine that one might think that a clip round the ear would confuse a child, being physically hurt by the ones who should love and nurture that child. Perhaps I was lucky that I didn’t see it that way even as a child; it was ‘tough love’ as they say. My parents showed their love for me in so many ways, and their way of ‘keeping me in line’ was all a part of that. I think, even then, I would have preferred the smack to the mental torture of being endlessly lectured. . . .
Roger
LikeLike
Hi Roger, I see your point of view. The one thing I would say though, is that talking to a child about their actions should be distinguished from lecturing. A well chosen tone and a connecting turn of phrase is often all that’s needed to show a child why their actions need to be reconsidered. The best explanations are therefore, not lectures, but explanations themselves.
LikeLike
Natasha,Nobody has said the majority is always right,but at least they should not be criminalised by a minority ! If that happens democracy is on the way out.We are not yet a dictatorship like Nazi Germany,Stalin’s Russia,or Mugabe’s Zimbabwe,where only the views of the dictator prevail so that talk of majorities or minorities is irrelevant.In a democracy it must be wrong to make criminals of significant minorities whether they be gays or child smackers.The principle is the same.Unfortunately social services are inclined to view anyone who disapproves of them and opposes them as being mentally ill,ie suffering from a borderline personality disorder,similarly to those who did not like the regime in Communist Russia.
I am in a strange position in this debate as I do not agree with smacking but I think it very wrong to make criminals of those who do.That is just a step away from one political party making criminals of all the others and few contributors to this excellent blog would agree with that!
LikeLike
Hi FA, thank you for your thoughts on this. I think realistically, there is a fine line when it comes to Majority Rule. It’s the much debated question over whether the majority in politics should always ‘win’ or whether we can allow a minority to make decisions for us. In today’s world, we experience a bit of both.
I do agree with you that criminal penalties for smacking are a bad idea – but we should maybe think about what smacking really is, asides of this issue.
It is hitting.
So we have to ask ourselves the question: when is an assault, on anyone, okay?
The answer must be, never, even by those who love us. Domestic Violence cases would cease to exist by that definition and emotional harm would be viewed as nothing more than a fantastical construct – which many think it is, still, despite the wealth of mental illness we see before us today, much of it stemming from emotional neglect or abuse.
We have to choose – do we want to take a step back, away from hard fact, scientific data (which shows us that hitting can be hugely detrimental to children) and accumulated experience or do we want to move forward, in order to make the world a safer place?
Prison is not going to be the answer here, and I disagree with the shabby offering in the Child Maltreatment Bill, having written about it, and the stupidity of jailing and fining parents in family law cases, lots, yet I do think we need to start looking at what hitting children means in practice and whether or not this is okay.
LikeLike
I must also add that the real danger is one of what the courts love to call “proportionality”.
If it is made illegal to smack a child I can see just one slap leading to adoption, as social workers look for any excuse to add to their adoption scorecards.Once en route to adoption via fostercare however they can be savagely beaten and sexually assaulted with no action taken so that many of these kids will suffer far more physical abuse in care than they ever did with their parents.
LikeLike
To my mind this stems back to competence issues. We keep issuing more guidelines and laws, but noone is following. Take the recent report by the Children’s Commissioner which showed that 94% of support agencies/ those safeguarding children (that’s police, social services, LAs etc) aren’t following the current guidelines on tackling child exploitation. I think that sums up neatly, and frighteningly, the lack of competence and quality inside the sector. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25090896
LikeLike
My son when growiing up same with my grandchild or with the children in my nursery when there was a problem I always said to the kids “right time for talks” we would sit and discuss the problem and the word I taught any kid in my life was to COMPROMISE always worked, and I loved it when kids were naughty because kids have to be naughty to learn, what upsets me is when a child falls over they are smacked for doing so and to say any thing to the person who hit the child is a no go. So to send a person to prison for smacking a child, who will be held accountable for all of the prisoners who are beaton up and murderd sexually abused in prisons and detention centres, I wish the nation would get their heads together and come out in force against the Governments who just keep making new laws as if they are doing some thing good for the people, when will people wise up and know all of these rules are part of ruling the people on mass do as we say or else yea go to prison and get more abused young people in care beaton up sexually abused young people in detention centres beaton up and sexually abused it is time for the British Governments and all who work for them to be sent to the unknown for they are the guilty ones. The people from all of the Governments institutions and they are in their millions over the years when adults use to say yea the do-gooders, last year I was frog marched out of the House of Commons by 3 armed police officers on made up charges, what did they think at 70 years of age I was going to do blow up the House of Commons well truth be known I wish i could have done so because there is no way the people on mass will ever be rid of the DO-GOODERS they know nothing of the truth from the grassroots nor do they want to know, and for the Commons to be blown up well that would not stop the elite they would with Tax payers money just build them selfs a new Commons so for me having witnessed for 40 years the cruelty of Governments to mankind here in this so called Great Britain it would be better for the world to end and this would save the children from all abuse, and lets not forget that MOST of the politicians and others are all of an age to retire like many of the judges in the courts all old and passed it, Oh sorry forgot the money they earn of course they cannot retire till they drop dead, so in the mean time let the kids and people on mass starve go to prison become homeless be sexually abused stolen and taken into care sold to the Paedos murderd let all of these abused kids and people drop dead ahhaha befor we do in Governments because we have to keep the nation under controle with OUR laws, and one of the reasons going on from the experiments on mass in Hitlers army was that Dear Old Blighty set up the National Health service to keep the experiments going on in the human race the English are so easly fooled and now so is the world, you can always research for the truth, and before i forget does any one know of the amount of Paedophiles there are in the UNITED NATIONS. Time the British woke up.
LikeLike
I think what the world also needs to be aware of is that Governemnts are ruling the seas the weather the earth, people are not aware that thousands of Farmers are paid untold money not to grow foods, and yet we on mass world wide are told
to many people in the world and not enough food to feed the poor, then in comes the big charities begging for money to feed the poor, and yea still the world starves, where I live we have untold 1.000s of acres of land doing nothing and one guess to who the owners are, so do all of the Government bodies who also own land get paid £1.000s to not grow crops and as for the rich people whose kids are brought up by NANNIES who ever questions the nannies who also abuse kids because the elite are so busy to bother with their own kids and yes send them to Eaton when of an age, and here as we all know buggery starts so of course let it continue with the Paedophiles who were from the likes of Eaton or some of the kids from care who are sexually abused and think it is normal to do the same. As for the show biz world many artists are sexually abused because they want to become famous, and no one knows that better than I do having been in show biz but refused the recording world because of what was and maybe still is known as the CASTING COUCH, it all makes me sick many stars were very normal before the CASTING COUCH.
Maggie
LikeLike
Hi Maggie, thank you for your comments.
LikeLike
Smacking. To smack or not to smack, that is the question. You will generally bring up your child the same as you were brought up or do the opposite if you didn’t like it.
I’m interested in the research that states smacking damages kids. Who conducted it and who was questioned? How many people were involved? What were the other factors that could be relevant? What I have noticed is research often mirrors what the government wants rather than inform the government before it makes its policies!
Personally I don’t like to see kids being smacked but hand on heart I can’t say that for some, would a few well deserved slaps have prevented them from getting into worse trouble. Hence I ask what other factors are responsible for the way a lot of kids are turning out.
We are living in different times and social workers are already trigger happy taking kids into care or for forced adoption. Parents will be walking more of a tightrope if the thresholds for taking a child is lowered still more. Judges are sending kids to detention centers at a much higher rate than ever before or dishing out ASBOs which prove to have little deterrent. Prisons are full so not everyone who has committed a crime will go to prison and those that do come out to commit more crime, again no deterrent. The internet can educate but can corrupt young minds too. No other generation has ever been so self contained and focused on an indoor cerebal activity.
Smack a child today and they will resent it and soon they will be encouraged, possibly by the schools, to take their parents to court. We are heading for a one size fits all society despite all the different cultures and I predict that the government in order to manage the population will end up looking after the kids, as depicted in some sci fi futuristic films, as it will become impossible to parent your own child the way you want to bring them up. Each family will have their own way of how they want to bring up their child but the government will want kids to be parented in a more uniformed, hands off, unemotional detatched way, rather like how they have been brought up, in boarding schools, with nannies and rather like foster care. Stopping smacking is unlikely to happen in this governments term but it will be pushed and pushed until it becomes a reality, rather like Blair’s policies are being actuated now.
LikeLike
Hi Dana, thanks for your thoughts.
The research on smacking can be found in the links on this post. However, I add some research for you below, which includes data to suggest that smacking could make children more successful and optimistic than their non-assaulted counterparts.
I’m rather tempted to say that this may be because once you’ve been hit as a child and found a way to cope with the aftermath, everything else may seem like a pretty easy ride. Or I could go with your sentiment and say all data is tailored to suit the government of the day etc. Either way, here is the research:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6926823/Smacked-children-more-successful-later-in-life-study-finds.html
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/findings/SmackingDebateNI_wda63277.html
Click to access child_abuse_neglect_research_PDF_wdf84181.pdf
LikeLike
Interesting comments thus far and as it’s impossible to discuss this on Twitter…
Given the news on the other side today about Domestic Abuse potentially becoming a crime, I’ve been thinking about this very debate too.
I fail to see where there is an actual problem with smacking children in so much as that it’s a huge problem that needs addressing. I can see why campaigners want to have DA as a stand-alone offence (I disagree with yet another law) yet I cannot for the life of me work out why this is featuring yet again. I don’t agree with physical punishment of a child. it’s not that I am against it as a whole – tapping a child on the hand when he/she is heading toward a plug socket is in no way abuse and smacking should not be criminalized. Assaulting a child is against the law currently (rightly so) – therefore, another law is likely to confuse people. Smacking and assaulting are two very different matters. One is physical abuse, one is not. Smacking someone across the face is hardly likely to result in a criminal offence.
If we look at “significant harm” then surely a child whose parent has a possibility of being imprisoned is more likely to cause that child harm than a swat on the hand?
As Roger points out above – lengthy lecturing is not good either. By the same theory, there can be as much psychological damage done to a child by lecturing for long periods of time. Of course, Natasha makes a good point in her response that tone and approach is a key factor.
I do think we’re in danger of becoming obsessed with campaigns over issues that are currently dealt with in the eyes of the law. Criminalizing parents, parents who are otherwise law-abiding and learning as they go along without actually breaking any law with their children, is a step too far.
I think there are too many laws, too much state interference. I’m totally against a law on smacking children. I’ve yet to meet a parent who actually agrees that smacking a child is warranted, yet I’ve also to meet a parent who hasn’t at some point or another tapped a child on the hand or even grabbed a wriggly child.
LikeLike
Thank you Natasha. I believe children are much more resilient and learn by their mistakes when they feel loved in a secure home, even if smacked by their parents. I’m not talking stereo type yelling and bashing hell out of a child on the way back from the pub. Its a problem when others, who the child doesn’t think is authorised/entitled to, smack that child, I believe that’s where there would be a conflict. I’m thinking now of step parents, fosterers, adopters.
The methods of restraint used by authorities in schools and care homes and detention centres on children, be they mentally disabled, mentally ill or otherwise, should be of more concern to the government who never seem to look at the abuse perpetrated by those they have tasked to prevent abuse.
As we are talking about abuse, taking a child from it’s family unnecessarily has to be the most abusive action a government can take, with more far reaching consequenses for the child.
LikeLike
Hi Dana,
I do see what you’re saying. I think the interesting aspect for me from a legal perspective is that we don’t tolerate hitting adults so readily. Even a tap on the face can send you to court. I find that interesting. I remember reading about cases at university where even the slightest intrusion into a person’s personal space could lead the perpetrator into hot water. The lack of equality is an unusual anomaly and it would be fascinating to analyse the possible reasons for that.
And yes, I think unjust removal is devastating for a child, whether immediately so depending on their age, or later on in life when they begin to understand they are adopted.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha,
As adults, there is full understanding of what you are doing if you hit another adult and you should be aware of the consequences. These laws may be more for control of the population rather that feeling agrieved over an individual. Lashing out in anger, for control of the other person, losing your temper, chastisement for some perceived wrong and the other “It’s because I thought you didn’t love me/you were leaving me/ you were with him/her” as if that makes it ok and inciting mob violence & more besides. There is no justification for hitting another! That may be because there are other alternatives that can be brought into play and penalties if it happens.
LikeLike
The whole point of smacking a child is very wrong BECAUSE that child will grow up thinking who ever may hurt them as an adult they will not smack that person but now punch that person, to smack a child is the start of violence Oh hit the dog he was naughty, hit a kid at school they shouted at me when will people learn that smacking can also lead to women being hit my a man who may have been smacked as a child, it is when any one works at a ground level one witnesses the evil in people, I have recently read up on mass murderes and guess what nearly every one was brought up with violence or in foster care. When this world learns to have respect for each other and for the children then the laws will be gone, but it will not happen, so let the Governments continue to let the world think they are acting “In a child’s best interest” and ruling the planets. People must learn to sit and discuss with children and adults the problem and learn to COMPROMISE, remember the children are the silent witnesses in care or with parents also remember all kids have human rights yea thrown out of the windows. One of the wonders of the world should be that to sit a talk to a child of any age regarding a disagreement is so fasinating to witnesses, thank god i did and the memory will take me to my grave.
LikeLike
This has been a very constructive and reasoned debate, and thanks to you, to Dana and to Tracey in particular for such an intelligent discussion. We can agree to disagree and respect each other’s views, the best way forward there is.
Perhaps we should ask now ‘what would be the consequences of a no-smacking policy?’ Would it lead to a better life for all, or would it turn us into a nation of wimps? Probably neither, actually, but just as there is a case for exposing children to germs, say, so they can build up a resistance to them, and live in an imperfect world, might there be a case for the occasional smack to stop them getting into worse trouble? I don’t know the answers to this, (and would never have raised a hand to my daughter), but perhaps somebody does. Meanwhile, the effective rape of families by the Social Services and the Family Courts continues – far, far more damaging to us all. Time to get back to sorting this out, methinks.
Roger
LikeLike
I’m bothered by the level of governmental interference in family life. Kids now being taken into care for being too fat. When will they take kids into care for being too thin? Kids are taken into care for anything it seems. The common denominator is kids being taken into care which is wrong. I wonder did anyone work with the parents of the obese kid before the kid was taken into care? If not, why not?
LikeLike
Simple really ;Stop “punishment without crime” Child cruelty will then once again be a matter solely for the police and the criminal courts.End of story.
LikeLike
Can’t help but agree with you both, Dana and Forcedadoption. It must be time to roll back Government interference in Family life, based on how its laws have been interpreted by Social Services and the courts. And you can’t make people ‘good’ by passing laws!
LikeLike
Considering the ban, it would be interested to learn from the experience of countries who already adopted it (like Sweden, for example). Some Swedish “dissidents” claim that the ban did nothing but open the gate ever wider for the State’s interference with family life.
Sometimes – in fact, oftentimes – the choice you have is not between good and bad but between shades of gray or between two varieties of badness (“choosing the lesser evil”). Such is the case with the smacking ban. Smacking is not good, but the ban will simply lead to the rise in the (already high) degree of the State’s encroachment on personal autonomy of parents AND children.
Why ban? Why not simply finance psychologists’ consultations to help parents cope with their anger, provided psychologists are BANNED from reporting on parents who reach out to them?
LikeLike
Pingback: huttrivervalley | The case for smacking children – is there really one?