Parenting Professor says that she supports smacking children

[ThisAmpleCritic]

Quote:
Prof Ellie Lee, a family and parenting researcher at the University of Kent …supports the use of smacking, said: "It would be great if we could just be nice to children and think they would just be nice back. But the reality of it is, is that in order for children to understand the rules of society, and to learn how to behave in a way that is moral, and that is good, we have to have boundaries, and boundaries have to be backed up."

AIBU to think this is a disgusting attitude and her credentials should be challenged? Children deserve protection from
violence and aggression from their caregivers. Why should they not be given the same rights as adults, who are free to test boundaries without fear of physical assault?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2eyke83yz9o

We are very different culturally and I take with a huge dose of cynicism the claims that youths in the UK are worse than elsewhere in the world. Smacking children is not good parenting; it just isn’t.

But we don’t have much without it.

Why does any consequence work? Why is confiscating their toys acceptable? Why is raising your voice acceptable? Why is cancelling a treat acceptable? Why is the naughty step or sending them to their room acceptable? Punishments are inherently not nice.

But some don't. How do you suggest dealing with the minority who consistently behave in an antisocial and even violent manner towards other children and, eventually, adults?

Genuinely staggered by this thread, both sides. Neither extreme is helpful. Children are desperately in need of the security and consistency of a dependable adult who installs confidence that all will be well. Reasonable and predictable rules bring comfort to people who are being overwhelmed with new input about the world is small children.

Firstly, be confident. YOU are the adult and thus responsible. Responsibility is about being authoritative, not authoritarian. So explain the rules calmly and with confidence, and the rationale, "we don't grab toys from others because...". Sometimes "because I say so" is fine, if it's done steadily, consistently and pleasantly.

Secondly, it's fine to be firm. Really wayward behaviour can be met for example by holding their arms down to sides, getting down to their level and saying "NO", again pleasantly, but develop a 'teacher voice' for such occasions.

Lastly be truthful. This builds trust and the child is more likely to get on board quickly. "Today we won't be having ice cream when we get to the park because we are having pizza for tea", whatever. If you are tired and want them to be quieter it's ok to say so, you are in charge. NEVER put the power in the hands of others, "I'll tell your father...".

Kids who understand the rules, know their routines and can rely on responses from their carers are relaxed, confident and calm themselves, the world is less scary and unpredictable.

Indeed. “Authority” and “obedience” are not dirty words when it comes to parenting.

If you still spank a child who is large and old enough to hit back then you’ve long missed the point you should have transitioned to other methods.

I didn't do any of those things, but neither did I use violence. I still managed to bring up two well behaved, polite children. It's not one or the other.

Bloody hell this poor child!

I hope this utter failure of a mother isn’t on this thread congratulating herself for “never raising a hand” to them.

Indeed. It was horrible. But I suspect not the first time she has spoken to him like that.
My point being though that verbal aggression can well take the place of a smack. And I do wonder how prevalent it has become.

I wish everybody would stop saying "smacking" or other euphemisms like spanking, tapping, raising a hand. It's hitting.

This is such a difficult topic. I received the occasional smack when I was young; I remember smacking DS on the back of his hand once, I never needed to again, and never smacked DD. Any law to stop smacking will actually never stop parents beating their children, or being abusive in other ways.

Neither are your children the carbon copy of every other child.

Smacking and hitting are different. People who are anti smacking never accept this but if I come up to you and smack your clothed bottom with my open hand and hit your head with closed fist you will notice the difference.

I think there’s a difference between a smack and a hit. I hate the word spank though, reminds me of Americans and BDSM.

It's not different. It's hitting.

See PP - if I come up to you and smack your clothed bottom with my open hand and hit your head with closed fist you will notice the difference.

still doesn’t make it OK.

Children need a variety of things to help manage behaviours not just consequences, the more actions that are present the easier it is for the child to understand and follow expectations.

• routines give predictability and help reduce negative behaviours due to hunger and other unmet physical needs
• connection with the adults around them. A child is more likely to listen and worry about getting things right for a adult who is consistently there for them
• consistency every child will test boundaries, if they know that everytime x happens y also happens it helps them link the two together and if it gets them what they want they will do it more

Part of the current problem is that for some children, their adults are more distant and distracted (work, phones, mental health difficulties, competing caring roles) routines and boundaries are not consistent (due to be tired, competing demands, child wearing them down) which leads to children’s behaviours escalating.I know with my own children their behaviour is worse when things are not a predicable, some children live with that everyday.
Active parenting is hard but so is being a child. And hitting children, especially when it’s because a parent has lost control, isn’t okay.

They are both hitting. I know why people are so vested in pretending it's different when it's a child, but it isn't. And it doesn't need a different word.

Agree @Crazydoglady1980.

Why are people so vested in “pretending it’s different”, @WhatHappenedToYourFurnitureCuz ? My argument is that the physical action is different but they are morally the same. Not really pretending there’s a difference, just using more specific terminology.

I wonder if she thinks smacking adults with a learning disability or dementia is also a good idea.

Or animals, maybe.

I'm surprised at a lot of these answers. You can't hit another adult if they annoy you or don't do what you want - shouldn't children be afforded the same protection under the law?

It's possible to discipline children without resorting to hitting. Parents generally smack when they're angry, at their wits end and lost their temper - it's rarely a calm controlled tap on the hand. I was smacked as a child and was definitely wary of my mum's moods.

I've raised 5 now adult sons without smacking and they're all well adjusted adults who have never been out of control or difficult to discipline. If you're consistent when they're young, it's much easier when they get older. You can't hit teenagers so you rely on the relationship you've spent years building with them.

People go insane when they see video footage of carers hitting old people with dementia. How is hitting children any different. They have roughly the same mental capacity but one is smaller. So it is ok to hit people smaller than you, but not the same size?

Changing the law changes the culture. It makes smacking seen as unacceptable in general society. There was a time when it was ok for children to be physically disciplined in school but a change in the law means we no longer see that as acceptable. It's less about criminalising individual parents and more about changing the over-arching culture.

Has she parental authority over an adult with autism or a learning disability?