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

well I can half see what you're saying but the thing that worked in the end was removing the danger (permanently) with your super-duper socket cover. birdyarms's example is actuallu more persuasive - as there was no way of removing the danger. I'm off to ponder .

although I still think banning would be good.

well just to help you bump - and because I'm bored tonight......If all smacking is banned how long do you think it will be before you grab your child to pull them away from danger and soemone reports you to the police? And what do you do if someone is hysterical?

How do you avoid the sort of stupidity you have now where a crying child who has hurt themselves can't be touched by anyone other than their parent (and their father will possibly be reported for it)? Surely what this should have taught us is that when it comes to children there is no defence.

Sorry to be boring about this but, hatwoman, if you grabbed by ds's finger and then removed him, he would just run back, so you remove him again, so he runs back again. It goes on and on. He finally stops running back to it. You occupy him with something else. The pohone rings, you amswer it and ds has his finger in the socket again. It becomes a challenge for him you see? A smack is more likely to work in that scenario I'm afraid.

Actually, we got a super-duper lockable socket cover thing for the main socket in our living room, so never needed to smack ds on that one - we were able to outsmart him in advance. Not always possible though.

[slap]

for carriemn

Haven't read the thread but I felt ashamed to have to answer yes to the 'have you smacked your child' question. I smacked ds1 once quite lightly on the leg when he repeatedly took his car seat straps off, aged 2.0 so not a very reasonable age. Tried everything else and did it as a last resort and actually it worked, he didn't do it again. I didn't do it in anger, more in desperation, and I'm pleased that I haven't done it since.

Whether or not it should be against the law is a tough question, I answered no on the basis that I don't think that every instance of a child being smacked causes great harm. But I do think that the fact that it's not illegal makes it much more socailly acceptable than it would be otherwise. Smoking bans do seem to have made smoking much less acceptable than it used to be.

agree with notmyfanjo and others, it sends the right message. physical violence is not acceptable. I can't get the principle that it's not ok to smack an adult but is ok to smack a child. and I really don;t get the idea of smacking to prevent greater danger, including with a non-verbal child. if my child's about to put their finger in a socket or run into the road then I find grabbing them is the most effective thing to do. followed by removing them from the danger. or the danger from them. how does smacking them actually help in that situation?

however I think some people are seeing this in black and white terms and forgetting how the law in general works. The law allows defences, it allows for mitigating circumstances. Now I personally can't imagine what they would be, but just because you criminalise something it doesn;t necessarily mean that you'll always be found guilty of it.

Bumping out of guilt that I may have killed this thread because my posts are SO well argued, that there is nothing left to say

I'm with LTH and also agree with expat.

I was beaten as a child; there is a massive difference than that and a single smack. A smack s something I ever do now, once or twice in the past in desperation but although I felt bad I don't think I was criminal. Desperate- but not criminal.

I have just realised that I have used a smack to protect my child from greater harm. Not as punishment, or in anger, but as a lesson where works are not enough.

Lucky you for those who have not had to do it, I will happily lend you my ds for a week, and while you may not smack him in that time I am certain you would be relieved to return him to me

Seeker - remove the kettle - well, we could have, but then he would simply go back to it when it was returned. He is that kind of child. Smacking his hand when he reached out for him gave him a shock, and he doesn't touch it now. It was either I smacked him, or he learned by getting burned by it. He is now three and still not a child who listens to reason. He will try to do whatever he wants to and has no fear. Therefore a physical shock is more effective than words or distration/removal.

As I said, I have never had to smack my eldest. She does listen, and does not want to make me cross with her, plus she doesn't have the dangerous streak that ds does. If I had just had her, I would probably say that smacking isn't necessary myself...

Not read the whole thres (usually a pet hate of mine) but to avoid being swayed.

I do not smack my child but reserve the right to in certain circumstances.

If DD was to ignore me and run into a road,I would have no hesitation to give her a smack-purely to shock her (as I have only doen it once befor)inot never doing it again.

Two warnings in a dangerous situation (eg-sticking things in plug sockets) would probably also need to a smack.

Because it has rarely(if ever) used the effect should be long-lasting. IMO

Done.
I have smacked my DC but very rarely and not for a long time.
I don't like to see parents hitting out at a child.

(I can't use the skiing holiday though so don't let me win that one.)

Depends if it was the kettle's fault for asking to be touched...

Why not a cupborad? Surely it's better to move the kettle for a month or so til the child grows out of that phase than smack it? (the child, obviously - smacking a kettle would be silly)

My attitude to smacking has changed since become the mother to a toddler. I used to think it was okay as a last resort, but now I can't see any reason why you'd choose to smack if your intention is to help your child to learn something from their punishment. There are so many effective ways to 'enforce discipline' (apols for the military sound of that phrase) that I think smacking is pretty pointless.

I certainly don't favour an all-out ban, though. As someone said earlier, if the aim is to reach those who are abusing their children, a ban won't do it. As for the rest of us, what we need is not judgment but ongoing support to become better parents.

I haven't smacked yet and hope I don't have to. I disagree with smacks as "punishment" in an older child. If a child understands that it is punishment for an action, they can understand alternative punishments such as removal of favourite toys etc.

But I do believe that smacking has a place, particularly for a younger, less verbal child in a dangerous situation. A sharp, painful shock to teach them that the road/plug socket/fire must be avoided, if they don't listen to "NO!".

ban. otherwise nothing much to enforce unless there is real harm. and it is just crap, losing temper with child and walloping it. or even worse, planning to hit.

why didn't she move the kettle? to where? a cupboard?

I support a ban on smacking.

Physical punishment is unacceptable. If I smacked an adult because I didn't like their behaviour I could be charged with assault, and rightly so. So why is it acceptable to assault a child who often doesn't even have the intellectual developmental ability to know what they have done wrong?

I don't know how it would be policed but making it illegal would send a clear message that it is not acceptable to physically assault vulnerable members of society.

Oh lord this is going to sound wa**ery, GeorgeandTimmy - but why didn't you move the kettle?

And did the smacking work?

Expat for PM!

A real tough one, this IMO. Pre ds I thought there was nothing wrong with smacking, post ds I don't want to use violence against him, but there have been times when, at the end of my tether, I have been less than gentle in removing him from what he is not meant to be doing and can feel myself getting worked up. The problem is that surely no one smacks when they are feeling calm and rational, therefore it not a good method of discipline. That said, I don't agree with the 'smacked children become violent' argument. I was smacked as a child, as were many people my age (late 30's) and I was not and am not a violent person.

look at what has happened with all the fuss about paedophilia - men hardly dare go near a child who is not their own, even to help them!

Criminalise smacking and you won't be able to push or pull your young child away from danger without someone arresting you, they can get run over/ burnt instead. Soon you won't even be able to hold them firmly if they are having a temper tantrum.

We already have laws about assault that are perfectly adequate to deal with cases where a child is being beaten.

Anyone remember the child who didn't want dental treatment?