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

I don’t think there’s a child alive who’s been damaged by mild reactive tap in response to them being violent to the parent.

But I think there are plenty of damaged and disregulated children because their parents have been too “kind” to them, and overly concerned about them experiencing slightest discomfort.

I didn't say they were, I was challenging the false dichotomy of "pleading, bargaining, negotiating" vs smacking.

You said
but am not so naive as to think that’s never necessary for all children.

Which means you think that it is necessary

I suppose you do not know your own mind.,

I immediately clarified in my following post.

Never justifiable, ever. It’s either a loss of control or a calculated act designed to hurt and frighten a child.

But this is a totally false choice. No one would have smacked her while she was on the climbing frame and then just let her carry on with climbing instantly. Realistically, smacking would have meant getting her off and restraining her to do it. You're right that sometimes you need to use force to restrain a toddler, and that it's a horrible, difficult stage, but smacking instead wouldn't remove the need for the restraint, so the question isn't whether it's better to manhandle or to smack, it's whether it's better to manhandle or to manhandle then smack and then manhandle.

Well yes. But the smacking would have stopped her going straight back on it.

So if I had to get her off it it would be

a) physical restraint, involving considerable force
b) physical restraint and smacking

both of which are rather unpleasant choices. Hence I made neither.

I get you - because I, for the moment, have the opposite kind of toddler. He is a natural born rule follower, listener etc.

But I'm not deluded that it's my parenting - I've just struck toddler gold (for now!). The worst thing I have to do if he's acting up is wander off and say "I don't want to play anymore", and I don't even have to do that often.

Some toddlers you need to grapple a lot more!

Why do you think the smacking would have stopped her going straight back on it? Because she'd then be scared of you? I've seen plenty of kids be smacked and carry on being defiant, it's not magic! Kids who know they might get a smack tend to be runners when they're in trouble so they absolutely need restraining.

It’s easier to parent with threats certainly and in the short term probably yields better results but it doesn’t make it right.

DD used to be fairly easy, then she turned two.

I am hoping it’s a phase. To be honest both my children are OK together and ds is actually a lovely little boy on his own. DD not so much but definitely manageable and I’m sure it’s just a difficult age / stage (I do remember ds being a bit of a nightmare at 2 / early stages of 3.)

Together it is horrific and it can be very stressful and overwhelming.

I think while we insist there are options that will get compliance and they don’t work it makes parents feel like a failure (or it does me) and then you end up with frustration and burnout. I’ve shouted at mine today and no I haven’t smacked or manhandled but I’m not going to feel superior about that as I know my words will hurt as much as my hands.

Quite; because she would be scared and quelled, in that moment anyway.

A bit of a short sharp shock and some embarrassment is sometimes no bad thing for a misbehaving child.

So have you smacked her then, to know that her reaction would be instant quelling and obedience, not, say, a massive screaming tantrum, hitting you back or running off? The whole issue is that two year olds don't have good impulse control or ability to discern the consequences of their actions so I don't think you can assume she would react 'logically'.

I used to live somewhere where you would see kids being smacked all the time, and kids were really badly behaved (and the teenagers committed a lot of actual crime). I never liked seeing kids get hit, but I also could see no actual sign of it working.

No, I just know my child, as I’m sure you know yours.

For everyone that supports smacking, do you think nurseries / childcare providers and teachers should also be allowed to smack children?

Ans if it doesn’t work? Particularly if you have a “difficult, violent” child? Smack harder? Choose a different part of the body? Use an implement? Where do you go with it?

Mine is heading for three, and we're still waiting for the terrible twos. Persuasion methods have evolved a bit as he's got older, but he's still basically very easy to manage.

It might flip overnight, but I'll just count myself lucky I've had it easy so far.

And when just a smack doesn’t work? How far do you go?

It's not one or the other...that's my point. It can sometimes (and need to) be both.

Discipline is not abuse. Equating smacking to abuse is silly.

It's not abuse, though. Calling it abuse doesn't make it so.

Lots of kids grow up lovely without a lot of things.

Some kids grow up smacking their parents because their parents were too silly to discipline them, probably out of fear of being judged by MN.

I didn't have to smack my DC but I damn sure would have, if they ever crossed certain lines, and they knew it.

I also raised my voice, when needed. This is not abuse. To equate any of this to abuse is so misguided and nonsensical.

I'm glad this professor is trying to turn this around.

Our society is full of abusive children, who think it's okay to abuse other children and adults, and it needs to change.

It won't change until we acknowledge the truth.

Not everything can be managed with good intention and feelings.

great post

Hitting children never made sense to me. They’re obviously far more vulnerable than adults yet if we hit another adult we could face prison time but we’re allowed to hit children as we see fit? If I smacked my DH because he was irritating me that would be DV but if I did the exact same thing to my DC, well they’re fair game because they’re under 18?? It doesn’t add up.

It’s just a sign of weakness. You lost control of the situation and lashed out. It teaches the children that it’s ok to resort to violence when stressed. I also can’t picture a world in which people grow up healthy and happy having to deal with the person who is supposed to love and nurture them smacking them for being annoying.

In what way is it different if an adult was to smack you?