To be happy it will soon be illegal to smack children?

[speakout]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-41678797

Brilliant news.

Smacking isn't exactly optimal parenting, but the kind of occasional tap on the backside most of us received as children in the 60s or 70s really wasn't damaging.

There are much nastier ways of disciplining children, imo.

Baffled by the "tap" thing. A tap doesn't hurt-by definition. So why would it be any sort of deterrent or punishment?

I don't know, Bert. Maybe being smacked just demonstrated that you'd been really naughty and your mum was seriously pissed off with you, and that was enough.

I don't condone smacking. But nor do I believe it's the worst thing a parent can do. I was smacked (very rarely) and honestly, my mum was amazing. Not managing children's behaviour at all, name calling, withdrawing affection. All are worse imo.

All these children who are so compliant and easy?
Well mine aren’t. I must’ve made many parenting mistakes I’m sure. DS2 is much more easy-going. DS1 is testing and difficult and has been since age 3 through till now at secondary. so I really struggled. I find parenting very hard.

Not that any of that relates to the thread topic of smacking, but I’m just saying.

I’m surprised by all the posters saying that it’s so easy and their children are so easy.

Is it Professor Winston who did the child of our time? who looked at children’s development?

or was it another program, children in preschool , aged 4-5. and the dynamics, watching them playing together and their different personalities and some of them were very dominant and some of them were really quite nasty. But didn’t come from bad homes.

Not all children are nice. Not all children are easy.

My children weren't easy. I don't think hitting them would have made them any easier.

And who will monitor every single parent whether they smack their kids in private?
It can also lead to witch hunt. If a toddler gets bruised by falling down the stairs the parents can be falsely accused of smacking the child and leaving bruises on the kid. I don't see any good coming out of it.

The point is that a 'smack' is being defined by some as a 'belting' so a 'tap' is a more accurate definition. The point is not to punish by inflicting pain, but to provide a momentary physical, and yes very mildly painful, sensation to shock or express disapproval. Is it good parenting? Not really. Is it abusive? Hardly, as what I'm talking about wouldn't pass for assault any more than a back slap or a high five.

Notwithstanding this, I support a tightening of the law on assault simply by removing the physical chastisement defence.... There are many other ways in which you can physically chastise through rough painful actions other than hitting, but by doing this we wouldn't be heading up blind alleys about what consituted a smack by potentially criminalising behaviour that fell short of assault whilst leaving other 'chastisement' untouched.

If I tapped someone on the shoulder and it was even mildly painful I would have got it wrong.

Naz, surely that's already the case though. Slapping a child hard enough to leave a bruise is already illegal.

Yes- the real problem is parents being falsely accused of hitting their children.

Bertrand,

Notice you ducked my question about whether it is ok to imprison a child? No such thing as a tap, no such thing as a ‘time out’, imprisonment is imprisonment.

This smacking thing is just an excuse for one bunch of parents to feel virtuous to another.

Feel v ‘meh’ about the whole thing. When you observe anything to do with children, it should be judged with reference to how the children respond and feel, not an adult’s projection.

How are we supposed to discipline children without time outs, naughty steps or the occasional in extreme circumstances 'tap'?
I'm genuinely intrigued at how people reason with toddlers who don't have a sense of reason?

I think sometimes there's a form of amnesia that comes when kids grow up and everyone suddenly lovely reasonable darlings.

It is mostly virtue signalling.

Some kids are just much easier than others as are some family structures.

I also think the elephant in the room is that there is a sex bias to this whole debate (whether through genetics or conditioning). On average boys are harder to control than girls and also don’t mind being smacked as much. My brother and I used to compare smack marks and find it hilarious (the actual physical pain is far less than everyday scrapes and fights or paint balling, which kids do voluntarily and leaves huge bruises).

You can tell kids who are beaten and abused in many ways from how they behave. You cannot, however, distinguish between kids who are occasionally smacked and those who are given other sanctions. That should tell you how unimportant it is.

"Notice you ducked my question about whether it is ok to imprison a child? No such thing as a tap, no such thing as a ‘time out’, imprisonment is imprisonment."

Duck it? I haven't seen it! But I think I can safely say I don't agree with putting children in prison either..........

This smacking thing is just an excuse for one bunch of parents to feel virtuous to another

Yeah, that must be it

Getting back to the OP - for those of us who think this Scottish bill is a positive move, I guess the things we can do now are:

• contact the Green Party and ask them to consider a similar move at Westminster
• contact our own MPs and ask them to consider putting forward a private member's bill
• those of us posting here who might have a bit of a public profile and influence might see how that could be used to get a campaign going
• if in Scotland, urge your MSP to support the motion

The point is that a 'smack' is being defined by some as a 'belting' so a 'tap' is a more accurate definition

Nonsense. I very distinctly remember being smacked by my mother; it wasn't a belting, but it was painful, and it absolutely was not a tap. And, I have to say, every time I was extremely resentful because it was so obvious that she was just taking out her bad temper on me, and I lost a degree of respect for her permanently as a result.

And who will monitor every single parent whether they smack their kids in private?
It can also lead to witch hunt. If a toddler gets bruised by falling down the stairs the parents can be falsely accused of smacking the child and leaving bruises on the kid. I don't see any good coming out of it.

Try that with slightly different wording:

And who will monitor every single carer to see whether they smack the elderly people they look after in private? .. If an elderly person falls downstairs, the carers can be falsely accused of smacking them and leaving bruises on them. I don't see any good coming out of a law preventing elderly helpless people from being assaulted.

Would that argument be a valid one?

Is it acceptable for one person to lock another up without a trial?

Huh? The police do that every day?

Ceto, you can usually reason with an elderly person and they are unlikely to deliberately run into the road or damage themselves and others.
While you extending the metaphor on helplessness is very good, it doesn't address the reason why normal sensible people would smack their child as a discipline.

And actually I'm stepping away from this now because I'll probably be lynched. Byeee!

It can also lead to witch hunt. If a toddler gets bruised by falling down the stairs the parents can be falsely accused of smacking the child and leaving bruises on the kid. I don't see any good coming out of it.

This is the current legal position throughout the UK: smacking is legal unless it leaves a mark or uses an implement (like a cane or slipper)

I'm staggered that someone "can't see any good coming out of" a law to protect children

"Ceto, you can usually reason with an elderly person and they are unlikely to deliberately run into the road or damage themselves and others."

So it's OK to hit an elderly person with dementia? Because you can't reason with her, and she is likely to damage herself and others?

A child who falls down the stairs and who is bruised is likely to be taken to an emergency room by the parents. If medical professionals are doing their job, I think it's highly likely that the parents will have questions to answer about how the child got those bruises even in jurisdictions where smacking is legal.

So if we can't smack them can we at least start using puppy cages for naughty small children? Maybe public stocks for teenagers, random mums could shout at and shame them, 'listen to your mother!' Perhaps kick a soft tomato. I have heard that teenagers brains experience shame much more deeply than adults do so this could be the perfect solution.

Chuck not kick. Because that makes all the difference...