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

[speakout]

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

Brilliant news.

@makeourfuture agree

I was dragged across the floor by my hair and beaten with a wooden spoon by my mother when I was 16....

Speakout ... would love to say I don’t shout... sadly I cannot! Even that makes me feel bad, today I saw my son actually flinch when I raised my voice. To be fair he had just Nerfed me in the face and it made me cry but even so, I’m the adult... apparently!

londonista you were shot in the face! there may be a time and a place for gentle parenting but that wasn't it! I'm sure he will have learnt his lesson and not do it again now xxx

Yeah Nerfed in the face at close range... he’s lucky it was me and not his bro!

But really my husband and I often liken parenting to a game It’s a Knockout, when you’re trying to do an ordinary task while a small person subjects you to random petty humiliations. Sometimes we do the voiceover “oh and it looks like mum’s trying to change the shitty pants one handed as she grabs the wipes with the other, but oh here comes the cat and the toddler has bolted after it. What’s mum going to do now?” etc etc

Do you know I actually have a bruise from that Nerfing. It really hurts! I think I’m going to have to get them goggles.

Apologies for that digression.

I said it. As far as I am concerned a smack is the same as a beating. It’s physically assaulting a child. Beating, smacking, hitting it’s all the same. It’s assault.

I agree.

I’m delighted that this is coming. It gives children the same rights as an adult not to be physically assaulted by anyone. Children should not grow up in fear of violence, and yes, by violence I mean a “smack”.

Abusive parents will continue to be abusive. This will only affect parents who smack when they feel they’ve run out of options.
Speakout - you sound smug and closed minded. ‘A close, respectful, relationship is key’ well how lovely. Please try and consider that by all family dynamics are the same as yours.

I agree speakout. Parents who hit their children know it's wrong because they always try to minimise it by calling it a "tap" or some other stupid word.

I used the word 'tap' as that's the word that best defines what I have occasionally done. To use 'smack' may have implied 'beating' which it wasn't remotely close to!

To regard a tap as assault is a bit like believing that a crowd applauding is engaging in mass self-harm!

Despite this, I am in favour of a ban on smacking. I would help emphasise that using physical pain as a means of punishing children isn't appropriate. However, a smack would need to be defined, and would need to differ from the definition of assault between adults, as an adult should not engage in physical contact if the other adult does not consent. However, a parent clearly needs to be able to make physical contact with their young child irrespective of their consent. I would legally define a smack as any contact that causes more than momentary minor pain. That would remove a harmless tap on the shoulder from being considered a smack for instance.

So again Speakeasy, how do you get the strong 12 year old out of the car who you DO have a loving, respectful, positive relationship with and you have already calmly discussed with why they cannot accompany you and need to get out of the car so you can drive off in it? If you're going to tell me your children are never naughty or disobedient and ALWAYS do what you ask I'll assume ether they're not normal children or you are a liar.

this thread is just so the non smackers have a place to be smug and judgemental bigbad. you won't get a sensible reply to your question. you know you weren't abusive so don't worry about it xx

However, a smack would need to be defined, and would need to differ from the definition of assault between adults - can't believe I just read this. Just don't smack them, defined or otherwise. Christ.

Yeah i don’t punch or slap children. I’m well smug! 🤔

It's illegal in Sweden. They nip instead

they had you feeling bad about shouting when you got shot though!

I don't punish.

Speakout - You have never ever punished your children? By punish I mean stuff like withholding treats (e.g. sweets) or things they enjoy (e.g. TV) , or requiring them to remain in a particular place (e.g. Naughty step), or make them do extra chores.

can't believe I just read this. Just don't smack them, defined or otherwise.

We're talking about making a law. Of course key terms need to be properly defined! For instance, if I thought smack was any physical contact, a tap on the shoulder could be deemed a 'smack' and therefore 'assault'. If it wasn't defined, who would be able to say I'm wrong!

If the law was that simple as you naively seem to believe we'd be able to get by on nothing more than the 10 commandments and leave it at that!

I smacked my children. If I hadn't smacked ds when he disobeyed me until he got into the habit of doing as he was told he would have succeeded in getting himself run over or would have managed to climb out of the 2nd floor window. he wouldn't have made his 5th birthday. But then that was before the option of plugging a toddler into a screen existed.
Now we have a generation of kids who are obese, mindnumbed and don't learn to talk properly because the only way their parents can manage their behaviour is with a smartphone, tv and sweets, and a generation of teenagers who think they can dow what they like without consequences.

Manc, I specifically pointed out that consent is a defence to assault, so you haven't exactly made an exciting new point in saying you can consent to minor assault. And the consent to being removed from Tesco's isn't implied, it's express. A parent has the right to consent on behalf of a child.

It still doesn't mean that the law accepts that a parent can consent on a child's behalf to the child being hit, otherwise there wouldn't need to be a separate defence of reasonable chastisement. It does mean a parent is not and never would be assaulting their child by picking them up and taking them out of a shop when they were playing up even if the "reasonable chastisement" defence disappeared because, guess what, that isn't chastisement.

I note that no-one answered the post about punishment and consequences from the poster who talked about twelve year olds throwing stones. Maybe if those kids had been punished whilst younger they wouldn't be such obnoxious kids and would grow up better adjusted?

Or maybe they spent their younger childhoods being knocked about by their parents and that's why they've gone off the rails?

I’ve never punished my kids. No withholding treats, no naughty step, nothing.

I’ve never punished my kids. No withholding treats, no naughty step, nothing.

So your either your kids do whatever they like and there are no consequences, in which case I bet your kids are a treat , or your kids are practically perfect in every way, in which case you're deluded.

missymayhemsmum Thu 19-Oct-17 23:48:36
I smacked my children. If I hadn't smacked ds when he disobeyed me until he got into the habit of doing as he was told he would have succeeded in getting himself run over or would have managed to climb out of the 2nd floor window. he wouldn't have made his 5th birthday.

That is such a crock. You hit him because you couldn't contain your anger. You hit him. Assault. Don't mince words.

And yes, parents all over the world manage to keep their children alive without assaulting them. I'm so glad for children today that parents like you will be on watch.

'I smacked my children. If I hadn't smacked ds when he disobeyed me until he got into the habit of doing as he was told he would have succeeded in getting himself run over or would have managed to climb out of the 2nd floor window. he wouldn't have made his 5th birthday. But then that was before the option of plugging a toddler into a screen existed.'

I have never hit any of my children (and no, the correct word is not the minimising 'smacked' - it's hit, because that's what it is) and the older two must have been 6 and 4 before they had any screens whatsoever.

I actually hate 'tap' more than 'smack'. A 'tap' is what I might give someone on the shoulder if I need to get their attention and can't do it another way. It's done with perhaps two fingers, not the whole hand, and is gentle enough to not be interpreted as unwelcome contact iyswim. If a 'tap' is to have any disciplinary force at all, it is of course going to be given with the whole hand and is of course going to be harder than an actual, real tap. It's a horrible, minimising word for hitting that appears to have come up with the decreasing acceptability of 'smacking'.