To wonder why on Mumsnet there is a smacking minority and in NZ 85% of people seem to want to do it?

[twentypence]

Lies, damn lies and statistics I know. But apparently NZ's new "anti smacking" law is opposed by 85% of New Zealanders.

Now I haven't looked into the proposed law carefully at all - partly because to actually find a fact amongst all the political posturing and soundbites largely because as I don't smack and never will it doesn't matter to me personally whether it becomes illegal or not.

But 85% just seems so high...

pretty bird, with all due respect, you have no idea if it hurts or not.
and if it doesn't hurt, then why does it "work" to alter the behaviour? is it just the humiliation?
I also believe that solving disputes with the use of applied force is wrong. I wouldn't dream of hitting another adult. what a strange and bizarre concept in a civilised society.

I do actually agree with Ekra - if I ever feel the desire to lash out, I distance my self from the situation.

Ds knows it is wrong to hit others. I don't think even if he could remember what I did to him (remember, it was only a max. of 5 times, spread over about 18 months, 4 years ago), he would even categorise it as hitting him.

We are always using our controlling power - if not, we are not doing our jobs right. We also use our superior strength to control our children, such as when we force them to stay with us in busy crowds when they are wee (or am I the only mother to have had to hold on hard to ds' hand when he would really rather be somewhere else ). In this particular circumsntace, it wasn't power I used, but shock value.

This is a scenario that another Mumsnetter once outlined, "He got a 'don't push dd away', then a smack on the hand and a 'I told you not do push dd'. Then cuddle resumed exactly as before, with one on each side. Status quo undisturbed. Alternative (time-out) would be: stand up off the couch, pick him up and carry him screaming up the stairs, shut door of room and wait 60 seconds, dd starts wailing because she was enjoying the cuddle with mummy and doesn't want me to leave, I come back to ds and give explanation again about bad behaviour, then a cuddle to help him get over tears, then return to dd who needs to be calmed and settled again... all that palaver involves FAR more of mummy's time and attention than a quick smack, which in this case did not cause tears (just a bottom lip poked out) - the whole thing was over, from smack to resumption of status quo in less than 20-30 seconds. Ds absolutely HATES going to his room - much more than a smack. But the smack seems just as effective at the right moment in curbing the behaviour. So why would I choose the option that distresses him more? Not always, but often, hauling him upstairs for time-out escalates the emotions on both sides. He gets distraught because he regrets it so much and doesn't want to go upstairs, and then he struggles and resists going up to his room, which distresses dd so she starts crying etc - and the whole thing can (doesn't always) become a much more heated, emotional thing than the smack typically does - often a smack situation remains very calm, the point that I'm serious is made, the smack does in fact stop the behaviour, but everyone is allowed to continue on as before (just minus the bad behaviour). Much calmer household, and much more pleasant for both children. "

What would you have suggested instead?

a question........... do you judge a book by its cover????? ......... no, you read it and then and only then can you make a judgement as to whether its very good or not.I wish people on here would do that, then maybe this debate would finally get somewhere. to all the anti smackers in here, ask yourself this have you ever screamed or shouted or done something to upset your dc? If you answer yes and are suggesting there should be no grey areas, then you too have abused your child. Lets all try not to be so narrow minded eh?

But you're assuming all is ticketty boo after you've smacked your child? Just because you go back to cuddling and things appear the same as before, it's all fine.

How do you know? How do you know what your child is internalising as a result of your hitting him? How do you know he's not sitting with you, scared to move in case you go for him again?

In terms of not pushing the other child away, I wouldn't haul him upstairs for time out either. You do sound extreme, I must say.

Continual, calm and repetitive, "No, don't do that," (however dull and boring for you!) usually does the trick. If it doesn't, then the status quo has to be altered which isn't a bad thing necessarily. Maybe he's not happy in the position he's in and pushing the younger child is his way of showing you that. Move the child away so that he can't push the younger one. Much like you would move a hot cup of tea.

The more his aggression escalates, the more solid a calm brick wall you have to be.

matildax and Prettybird - why the assumption that a parent that doesn't smack must use time outs or shouting?

I really want to leave this alone now becuase no one is getting anywhere, but "scared that you might go for him again" is getting a bit carried away, are you serioulsy picturing prettybird as some derranged red faced abuser becuase she occasionally taps her son's hand?

"If you answer yes and are suggesting there should be no grey areas, then you too have abused your child. Lets all try not to be so narrow minded eh?"

I suggested that there is no grey area where smacking is concerned. I don't get what you mean???

ok so my name may not paint me in a particularly good light...

oh what your telling me that you have never raised your voice??? wow you are seriously amazing and a credit to motherhood. im going now, have things to do, i will check in later.

Oh, well, one born every minute

ekra, I do strive to be perfect in every way I strive not to smack, not to shout, not to ignore, not to have a mean attitude, not to betray my exasperation. I do strive. I do occasionally smack. I'd rather I didn't do any of the above, but I don't think smacking is the worst I have done to my DCs (my shouting has, at times, been far worse)

Spandex - You also clearly haven't read my postings. I do abhor violence, and as I have said before, was against corporal punishment (and was brought up to be against it) long before society in general deemed it to be wrong.

Harpsichordcarrier - I know it doesn't hurt bar a momentary sting, because I have done it to myself, probably harder than I did it to ds. Now I acknowledge that I can't know for sure how it felt to him (although he didn't cry), nor can I state with certainty what made him stop. I beleive it was the shock value - it gave him enough pause to stop whatever it was he was doing.

I also don't beleive in hitting other adults - my "invitation" to Spandex was in response to her comment to me. And my comment about "hitting" other peoples hands when stealing my last Rolo was meant tongue in cheek. FFS - there used to be an ad about people doing just that, with no compalints about promoting a culture of violence!

There are things I do with my ds that I wouldn't dream of doing to another adult. I wouldn't dream of forcing another adult to go to bed if they didn't want to. But as a loving mother, I make ds go to bed before he wants to. I wouldn't dream of holding on to another adult's wrist and dragging him/her around a shop unwillingly - yet I have had in the past to do that with ds. The altranitve would have been to leave him unattended - which you can do with an adult.

Children are not the same as adults - we are having to teach them boudaries to make them into good adults. You may disagree with one tiny (and now in the past anyway) technique that I used - but as reposnsible parents, I beleive that we do all have the same obejctives.

Are you saying you cannot control your urge to smack and that if the law changed you wouldn't be able to stop yourself?

That question was to catASTROPHE

So Spandex you say it is I say it isn't .
I say I'm right, you say you're right.

Nothing has been proved. Only opinions given.
What I dislike about these threads is the way the anti smackers go round as if they are right just because they think they are.
They are not

I will continue to use smacking as part of my disciplinary repetoire.

Thnkas for that Wildwoman! (and just to clarify - it's not even "taps", it's "tapped" - 3 years ago, without the slightest inclination to do it again.

(OK, I lie, I have been tempted on occasion, when I am getting angry with ds for whatever reason, but like Ekra, I distance myslef from the situation as I recongise that it is wrong)

BTW, Spandex - the scenario I quoted was just that, a quote from another Mumsnetter's posting from another thread. I only have one ds and no other child. But I could see what she was getting at - in her judgement, for the sake of both her kids, that was the strategy that worked best on that occasion.

And Kitty - what would you do if a complete smacking ban came into force in this country?

And how do you currently ensure you don't leave a mark on your children?

"matildax and Prettybird - why the assumption that a parent that doesn't smack must use time outs or shouting?"

Yes I agree. I think parents that tend to be very stricly opposed to smacking also do not agree with time out or shouting. These are really not the best ways to descipline a child. We all get stressed and fume and froth at the mouth with our children. Ds is a very very active child. I need masses of energy to keep up with him.

They might do something again and again and again, not to piss you off, but because they sometimes just don't have the ability to REMEMBER or focus on what you just said 2 minutes ago. It is that simple. So you have to keep repeating yourself verbally until they are old enough to understand.

I read somewhere that little boys lose some of their hearing when they are going through rapid physical development. I forget the authors name, he is quite famous. I was amazed by this. He said sometimes even if you shout across the room at a little boy, he may just not HEAR you well, because he has gone a bit deaf ! It isn't beacuse he is trying to spite you That explains a lot about ds, now 2.9 yo. He just totally ignores me sometimes, probably because he just can't hear poor lamb and he has never ever had an ear infection in his life, it is a development thing related to hormones !

Kittywaitsfornumber6 point taken that you feel you're right and that anti-smackers feel they are but, following through on your smacking train of thought, if you thought an adult had misbehaved, you would be entitled to smack them.

The likely result would be you up on a charge of assault.

If the law protects adults from being hit then why doesn't it protect children. They are people too!

Everyone on this thread needs to get a grip, the petty name calling and over exageration of situations is nothing but childish.

Anyone who is truely abusing a child will pay no attention to a law that makes smacking illegal and it infurriates me that decent parents who smack a childs hand from time to time are being lumped into the same group.

But what annjoys me more are people who use bloody reward charts

Wellowrose: Nowhere have I assumed that - I have used them purely as exmaples of alternatives that could to some children be worse than smacking.

What I have done, to be construcitve is to satart a thread Non-smacking parenting for really challenging kids and incredibly hard situations for people to suggest alternatives to those (not just catASTROPHE) who are finding it hard to cope.

Even though I no longer smack (through my own choice and not as a result of these threads), and do not consider that I am struggling, I have found some useful suggestions there.

I look forweard to seeing your contributions on the other thread!

"the petty name calling and over exageration of situations is nothing but childish. "

never a truer word ....

ekra "Are you saying you cannot control your urge to smack and that if the law changed you wouldn't be able to stop yourself? "

well, yes and no. I'm not saying I have no control over my bahavior - of course I do, and I am responsible for my own actions.

But when (if?) you have shouted at your kids, or at your DH for that matter, you probably did it in a moment of anger or whatever, so in that sense it was not 'controlled' behaviour.

I'm sure you're thinking I must be a terrible psychopath who is out of control. Can you see though, that we all lose control at some times, otherwise we would all be able to adhere to our own moral code all of the time and be perfect. Which would be nice.

ekra, I was trying to get across the fact that for most practical purposes we do have a smacking ban - (if it leaves a mark etc which it usually does) so those admitting it on this thread risk prosecution which is a good thing too. It is never right to use physical force against a child. Obviously I would prefer if it were banned even if it didn't leave marks as that's a clearer message to the smackers.

And yes if someone isn't coping with their chidlern they need help not a vindication and pat on the back, carry on smacking if it works for you which is why for some mothers and fathers it's just not right to be with the children 24/7. Some children are in effect saved from a parent who doesn't really cope well with being ap arent 24/7 by going to nursery.

Cat, we can all lose control. Plenty of husbands and wives hit each other never mind hit their children but that doesn't mean I'd like to see wife beating decriminalised.