Would you ban smacking? Take our two-question-takes-less-than-10-seconds poll (and be entered into this week's comp)

Some people on this thread have said they sometimes feel like smacking their toddlers, but never would.

I couldn't agree more when it comes to toddlers. But it would be interesting to see if everyone who started out as a non-smacker had still never administered a single smack by the time their child(ren) turned 18.

Some of them would still never have been provoked to that point (lucky them). But I would suspect that it would be by no means all of them!

I would agree with you (although I wouldn't equate a small slap on the hand with a whack). I was brought up with smacking, I don't like it, I think it's demeaning and having seen first hand that it doesn't work I don't plan to do it again if I can help it. But criminalising it would not have helped me to make that decision.

A real "whack" should not come under the defence of "reasonable chastisement" IMO. I think currently the guideline is whether it leaves a visible mark or something? If it leaves a mark that can be seen by a third party some time later then that's more than any smack!

I'm not perfect. I don't think we all have to be perfect to have an anti-smacking law (after all as I've said countless times we have it for adults, and we seem to cope - no one is proposing reversing that law just because it gets broken. Most laws do, you know).

And I can't guarantee that one day I won't lose it and smack. Maybe DS just hasn't driven me mad enough yet. But if it happens I won't try find some way to justify it - it would only happen because I lost control. Can children grow up to know how to cross the road safely and be careful around electricity and sharp knives without being whacked? I think they can.

Oh I'm loving all these perfect parents here on Mumsnet. Where are you all in real life that's what I want to know?

I seem to recall I said I don't think smacking really works. At least I'm honest enough to admit my failings as a parent (which undoubtably are many).

Once again, banning smacking would be utterly stupid. Tighten the definition of "reasonable chastisement".

I just don't get it - when a child is in a dangerous situation and about to do something that will harm them, you pull them away, don't you? I've done it countless times with DS and never felt the need to smack him - moving him away from the danger is top priority, I can't see how a smack would help at all.

I admit I have felt the urge to smack him and that is in situations like some of those described here, when he's really hurt me (pulling hair, poke in eye etc as toddlers do) - and I'm really glad I've resisted because it's clear as day to me that that urge is about my own pain, rage and frustration. Smacking would be inappropriate with a toddler who hasn't even done those things deliberately and doesn't understand.

I'm not judging people who have lost control and done it and regretted it - but don't try to justify it by saying it's necessary to save a child getting hurt. What utter twaddle.

Hmm - a sharp slap on the hand, or a serious scald from boiling water??

So am I going to be traced and prosecuted with retrospective legislation then, having given my email address 'n' all?

All they need to do is use the current law properly and issue clearer guidance on the meaning of "reasonable chastisement". Anything else is just political manouevering IMO.

I have smacked my 2 year old a handful of times. Not proud of it, don't think it really works and have only done so as a last resort. But even if it takes him aback and makes him laugh, it distracts him from attempted electrocution or whatever else life-threatening activity he had embarked upon.

i have smacked.it doesnt work and leaves all involved feeling worse than ever.i get to the point(very rarely i must say!)when it feels like the only answer,but ofcourse its not.if it was illegal it wouldnt feel like that.
(do i now sound like evil bad parent???)

I have smacked my DS1 twice for scratching his ds2 as a newborn, and I was wrong, it did none of us any favours and didn't stop him going on to hurting his brother.

If it were illegal maybe I would have thought twice about hitting him in the first place.

and that surely can't be a bad thing.

Yes to a ban IMO. I agree with fanjo (and lots of others). It needs to be illegal so it can be used for those that beat their children. Of course it won't be used for the occasional smack on bottom. I often feel like smacking my toddler if he's being annoying, but never would (I hope), and know it wouldn't work anyway and would just teach him that violence is the answer.

As someone said on the radio this morning, outlawing smacking whilst letting parents nurture obese offspring is going too far. Raising your children to be totally unhealthy and overweight is a life-sentence you impose upon them. We can certainly dissaprove of something without banning it - that is a sign of a mature, sophisticated culture.

When I was naughty I got a slap and if I was at school I got the cane and a slap for getting the cane when I got home

Nanny state {angry]

I voted no. Because otherwise I would have to hand myself in. I have smacked DD for dangerous things - today for example she was about to poke her hand in a babies eye, I slipped my hand in and tapped hers away with a stern "no", we then talked about being gentle with little babies etc. She spent the rest of the time there being lovely to said Child. She later told me babies are lovely but too small

"The parents who abuse their children will continue to do so regardless of this or any other law."

In fact the evidence for this is absolutely to the contrary.
reports of physical abuse (and children recorded as being at risk) are on the decline, in large part because the tolerance of physical abuse is lower than it used to be. Changes in the law are responsible for this, in part.
if hitting your child becomes socially unacceptable, then it is lesslikely to happen.
like drunk driving.

Abuse in any form is a terrible thing and should not be tolerated.
Abuse is already illegal in this country.

Occassional smacks in extreme circumstances are different from abuse.

People on this thread have described how being smacked can damage children mentally and can lead them to 'living in fear'.
I have never smacked my own DD, but I was smacked by my parents. They only ever did it a handful of times and in extreme circumstances, but it certainly got the point across.
I never repeated the actions that led to the smacks and I still remember them to this day.
However, I never felt fearful of my parents or that they had abused me in any way.
I don't consider that I was in any way mentally or physically harmed by the experience.
It seems to me that this is another example of the British nanny state and the government bringing in over-controlling laws.
I fully agree that certain children need protecting, but the chances are that this will not protect those most in need. The parents who abuse their children will continue to do so regardless of this or any other law.

oh - no didn't mean to post here - how did that happen????

(Waves at tsm!!!)

OK.... I filled in the survey...

I can't wait for our shiny new topic and my skiing holiday, if I win!

(Although I am still in doubt whether mine worked seeing as I am in not in ol' Blighty)

There was a debate on the Radio 2 lunchtime show about the cane issue - callers phoned in with their views: one guy told his ds's head that he had his permission to cane his ds when his ds was on the school's premises but the head told he was not allowed so the dad said, 'give the cane to me and I'll do it'!! Other callers had different views - similar to this thread.

Assault on kids is LESS acceptable than on adults imo.

And assault be a relative is clearly worse than assault by a stranger.

Smacking is abhorrent - it is ASSAULT plain and simple and should be illegal.

I wonder how many of the mums who smack their own children would tolerate a teacher doing it ( for the same reasons they do).

I am totally for a complete ban against any smacking of any child.

Slight tangent here but I'm sure you all saw the news story recently about 1 in 5 teachers being in favour of bringing back the cane...by contrast only 1 in 10 headteachers were in favour of the same. I wondered if the difference in viewpoint in these two groups was due to the teachers' and heads' respective distances from the frontline? I know the argument about hitting children teaches them violence but who can honestly say that our culture hasn't seen a huge rise in youth-violence over the last ten years or so. It's interesting that many school teachers would like to reinstate corporal punishment yet at the same time, there remains a very strong sentiment against smacking.

I thought it said smoking not smacking!

I always said I wouldn't smack, but Tom does get a smack when he lifts his legs up and slams them into me when i'm changing him. I give him a warning first. And he gets a smack if he is doing something dangerous or hurting another child.

The ski-ing holiday. It says for a family it doesn't mention the size of the family. Does that mean that my averagely large family could all actually go?

I am sorry but I think I am missing something here, why would you have to hit/smack a child if it is running onto a road or in some other way endangering themselves on or near a road?

Would you not see that they are running onto the road, then proceed to pull them off the road?

Are you trying to show them what it would feel like to be hit by a car (smack in the head, shoulder, arm, leg, here little Johnny feel that and then imagine what it would feel like if it had been one of the cars hitting you. I bet that a 3 year old aint gonna get that).

Some of you say that you want to shock them, well you shocked me by choice of punishment. Do you need think that by you (probably) screaming his/her name in sheer terror proceeded by pulling him/her off the road is going to shock him/her enough? Does he/she really on top of that horrible experience also have to be physically punished.

I think banning smacking completely would certainly raise awareness of the issue (because of the publicity it would garner) but I don't think it would eliminate child abuse within the home because it would be impossible to enforce. Domestic violence continues for precisely this reason. However, if somebody is smacking their child to the extent that marks are being left, then it is to be hoped that outside agencies would notice and take action accordingly.

But short of a fanciful reality (I hope!) in which the Government make it compulsory for CCTV cameras to be installed into every single home, then any degree of violence within the home will remain unchecked. However, a ban would enable public smacking to be picked up on street cameras.