If i had done what a horrible mum did to her child, to her, i would be up on an assault charge.

[LEMneedsaholiday]

I was in the sweet shop with DD yesterday, we are after chocolate . Mother was with her child with her dodgy looking geezer hanging around outside the shop. Her DD must have been about 18m, so she was obviously going to head for the sweets - which were at her level - her mother was buying cigarettes - growled "leave it" and when she reached out for the sweets she pushed her backwards by her head, quite hard so she fell back. I really wanted to do it to her - and then ask her how she liked it, but of course if i had, i would probably been arrested.

Why is this OK? Well its obviously NOT ok, but in the eyes of the law?????

This wasn't meant to be a smacking thread - not on a friday night! FGS This was not a smack to the back of the legs or a smack on the hand, it was horrible because it showed a total disregard for this little girl - Christ on a bike, she had just forked out X amount of pounds for her cancer sticks, why couldn't she buy her little girl a milky way or something - something tells me she wasn't bothered about her teeth!

Surely Friday night is exactly the night for a smacking thread... we just need to turn our attention to the DHs/DPs

Not when DP is late home with the wine evening supplies it isn't! And i think that is something QUITE different you naughty person!

If a gunman is about to shoot a civilian, the police can shoot the gunman.

That analogy would then be, with children, if your child is about to hit someone, you can hit them.

The whole concept that you can model family life on the behaviour of the state seems dubious.

Also, as this is done by the state, can I use a large dog to grab my child and bring them down if they attempt to evade me forcing them on to the naughty step?

MillyR - you completely get my argument.

Adair - I think you are right. If you can discipline by tone of voice then that is obviously the best way, and their does need to be consequences but one of those consequences could be a smack. I will give you a dilemma: if my child was trying to run into a busy road, persistently and each time I had to restrain him physically and tell him not to - what exactly would be the consequence for a 2 year old? If I keep on letting him try to run across the road he could succeed and get hit by a car. Really in this circumstance it's a balancing act. I would want to give him a smack so that he didn't cause himself a more serious injury. Is that actually wrong?

MillyR, I like your last comment.

Ali - I don't think a smack would teach him that lesson though. Not even that it is wrong just not effective. I would (and my son is exactly that 21mth old!!)

1. remind 'stay on the pavement'
2. praise when he does it.
3. watch him like a hawk (he is only 2!)
4. if he goes towards the road, remind him and physically guide him.
5. if he goes again, remind him and say 'if you go over there, you will go in your buggy/I will carry you'
6. if he stays on path - praise him
7. if he goes towards road - put him in buggy/carry him
8. try again in a bit

it works. HONESTLY.

I'm totally anti smacking, pushing, dragging of any kind.... both of adults and children.
I have never understood how anyone could do something to their own children that they would not particularly appreciate being done to themselves.

Imagine someone rushing over and smacking you because you ran across a road ( i'm using that analogy as it's the danger aspect that many people use to justify smacking ). It's just not acceptable behaviour on any level.

As for the actual posting....my concern is always what the parent is capable of behind closed doors if they behave in this way in a sweet shop.

Blimey, that all sounds a bit hit and miss to me - simple solution

oops, simple solution = reins!

I pushed Ds2 flat onto his face by the head once, and anyone who saw would have thought it was deliberate.

In reality, I touched the nearest part of him to guide him away from the road, and I was very gentle but I caught him on one foot and knocked him off balance.

not everything is as cruelly intended as it looks.

I have hurt my children accidentally quite often, because I'm a klutz who has no hand eye coordination. I always apologise ythough.

ah thats it, she was pushing her child away from the dangerous sweets, yeah, right, thats why she had to do it so hard and so viciously!

yeah ... You do need a holiday.

yep

Oh god, don't get me started on dog leads reins

I would be terrified of yanking ds around MORE with reins tbh. My method seems to work fine!

Reins are the spawn of the devil and only serve to delay the problem.
You walk nicely at the side of me or you go in the buggy.
The trick is, to tell them once and then actually put them in the buggy.
It's not rocket science and it really does work.

good to see you maintain an objective view on reins and dont resort to hysterical hyperbole

without reins my children would run under a bus

Don't agree about reins. They were great for my DD who was an early walker, but too young to be expected or trusted to follow strict instructions.

ah no, reins are great for hoiking! tottery toddler, goes to trip - hoik!!! I don't know why people get on their high horses about them.

As far as my OP, i guess you had to be there.

Oh God - the old running into the road excuse. Most of us have had toddlers, very many of whom have been inclined to want to run into roads. How come many of us have never had to resort to smacking in that circumstance?

LEM - you were there. You have described the circumstances clearly. I don't get why it's hard for some to believe there's a valid excuse for that behaviour

sorry - that makes no sense. Meant to say "I don't get why some people are so keen to think there's a valid excuse for that behaviour"