To ask if you ever smack?

[thatwasntverycleverwasit]

I am suffering from enormous guilt having delivered one swift smack to the back of DDs legs when I was at the end of my rope (first, and I hope only, time). Yes it was unreasonable and I said sorry to her. But it seems to be a completely taboo subject - surely I can't be the only Mum to have done this?

Mine were young in the 70s/early 80s and I can still remember the rare occasions I smacked [dd three times and ds twice]always when they had 'deliberately' endangered themselves usually by wandering off/not coming straight home from school aged about 6/7 [we could see the school from our house and only road very quiet one opposite house].I regret it now and would hate it if my dc smacked dgc but they dont.We do what we can I think-sometimes its not our best parenting but whatever most of us do is done in love.Let it go and move on.

it's still hitting however "reasonable" you think it is

and the law is pretty nebulous around what does and doesn't constitute a "mark", so if you are smacking your child in front of other people you are taking a big risk

calling it something else doesn't make it something else - you're hitting someone who is smaller than you, to assert your will over them

you are old enough to know better

in fact my 6yo is old enough to know better

There is no difference between 'hitting' and 'appropriate physical chastisement'. What does that even mean?! You are physically striking your child. That is hitting, however you try to dress it up.

I reckon my nana with dementia is about as capable of making rational decisions as a small child.

I wouldn't consider hitting her if she ran out into the road, if she endangered herself or if she was doing any of the other examples here. Nor tapping her, smacking her or any other form of physical chastisement. Would a small smack of chastisement be reasonable?

Genuine interest.

"You nearly hurt yourself then, so I'm going to hurt you, just to make sure you don't do it again".

It just doesn't make any sense to me

all the same old bilge about running into roads and sticking fingers in plug sockets gets trotted out every time on these threads

the children of smackers are clearly part lemming and hell-bent on meeting a gory end at the earliest opportunity

personally if my children are in physical danger my priority is to make them safe, not give them a slap

lol at the choices being "your dd is in a box" and hitting her

that is YOUR failure, if you haven't the intelligence or the decency to come up with anything better

oddly my children seem to have avoided major calamity despite not being hit on their hands or anywhere else.

altinkum, you keep saying that you aren't hitting your child. You are. This isn't an opinion. It is a fact. It doesn't matter how hard you do it, or whether it is within the limits of the law (), you are still deliberately moving your hand in a way so as to connect with your child. Therefore "hitting". Look it up!

hit (ht)
v. hit, hit·ting, hits
v.tr.

a. To cause to come into contact: She hit her hand against the wall. b. To deal a blow to.

source:

personally if my children are in physical danger my priority is to make them safe, not give them a slap

I have to say I agree with that, making them safe is an entirely different matter to making them behave.
The person who I know who is most vocal about how she doesn't smack I once witnessed having stones thrown at her by her 6 year old in the street whilst she told him his behavior wasn't acceptable.

The thing about smacking as I said 7 pages ago is that no it doesn't work, no it's not ideal, not big and not clever but my god you'd have to be a saint not to because children can press your buttons in a way adults simply never would.

That's just not true mamatomany, one of mine is a very challenging child with Aspergers and I have never hit him - he does push my buttons and I woupdn't have believed before having children how cross they can make you - but I deal with that, it's MY anger and he doesn't deserve to be hit

I'm not a saint, I just don't believe in solving my problems by hitting people - and even if I did, a small defenceless person would be the last person I would hit

I find it easier to understand parents who lose their rag and smack once though, than parents like altinkum who are able to talk about hitting a child as a matter of policy, saying "well it works" (torture "works" too, that doesn't make it acceptable"

yes, by "physically chastising" her you ARE hitting her - unless you are pinching her or pulling her hair You are hitting her, aren't you?

The fact that you refuse to admit that what you are doing is hitting shows that you know it is wrong.

actually the law does nOT state that smacking is not hitting - the law simply allows for mild hitting to be done as a reasonable punishment

the law draws no distinction between hitting and smacking, because there is none

smacking a child is classed as an assult - there is then a statutory defence of reasonable chastisement

That's just not true mamatomany, one of mine is a very challenging child with Aspergers and I have never hit him

And nor should you, he is not able to control his Aspergers but I would suggest when faced with a perfectly well NT child who is just being a bloody nuisance and is well aware what they are doing and keeps doing it after a warning you may or may not react differently who knows.
I do know though I wouldn't condem a parent who is doing their best, loves and cares for a child who is being very naughty for smacking them. Every parent knows a smacked bottom is entirely different from a slap around the face for example, there is a line.

I do have an NT child as well, and I have never hit him either

it's just not true that you'd have to be a saint not to do it - lots and lots of parents manage their children without ever hitting them

I mentioned the AS to show that it isn't only parents of "easy" wel-behaved children who manage not to smack

and I think that the difference between a smacked bottom and a smacked face is smaller than people who smack would like to think - especially from the child's perspective.

Hitting people is wrong. Always. I'm glad I can tell my children this without having to qualify it with "apart from when I hit you, that's different".

yes i have tapped my ds2 hand but he just laughs at me

Good grief. This could go on all day. Most of us know that what you call 'chastising', altinkum is in fact 'hitting'. Dress it up however you like to appease your guilt, but you cannot change the definition of a word to suit your own ends. The definition of a word is not an 'opinion', FFS! If that were the case, it could be my opinion that from now on a horse is something you write with.

Personally, I couldn't give a fuck if the law says "you may hit your child so long as it doesn't leave a mark". It doesn't make it morally right.

You (altinkum) are resorting to the "I'm legally in the right" point of view because it makes you feel better. But I can't believe you think that what you're doing isn't 'hitting', whether you're leaving a mark or not.

For the record, 'smacking' also = 'hitting'.