To Smack or not to Smack

[Tigger2]

Henry McLeish, Scotlands First Minister is trying to put a Bill through that children under the age of 3 should not be smacked. What are everyones views on this. And do you think this will lead to a total ban on smacking altogether?

Smacking on the head is clearly dangerous. But with smacking in general, people forget that very often you aren't calm when the kids are mis-behaving. I have smacked (which I regret) just out of annoyance. I didn't stand there thinking "now is smacking a suitable punishment for this situation". Then there are other times when you are actually calm but only a smack will work. Jack once went to stick his finger in a socket and I smacked him; I could hardly explain in a few seconds "now dear, you shouldn't do that!" because by then he could have blown himself up!

I got smacked by my Mum a lot as a child very often when I hadn't actually done anything wrong, it was just because she was being bad tempered.

This is really so hard. I, personally, dont like smacking and dont see it necessary to hurt your child. I know sometimes I say that some children Im sure will only understand this type of punishment, but for some it can get completely out of hand. I was never smacked when I was a child and neither was my husband. We were able to be taken anywhere and everywhere and understood right from wrong. I watched a man run after his little boy, I suppose he was about 7, down the road to smack him (it looked like he had kicked or hurt his older sisters leg). He really smacked him and the boy just looked at him and carried on walking, I would say on this occassion it did nothing. On another occasion I was busy getting fruit and veg and heard this really loud smack then this scream followed by load crying. A man behind me had his son and daughter in the trolley and had smacked her on bare legs, I felt sorry for her, the look on her face, it had really hurt, her dad wasnt a small man. Normally you hear if a child is misbehaving enough for that kind of discipline, but I had heard nothing from her, just that nasty crack. Some of us may be level headed enough not too lose our tempers to the degree that the smack is no longer a punishment, but there are plenty that are not and I suppose they are trying hard to protect the children in these situations.

There's an item in the Saturday paper about smacking, basically saying that it benefits the parent as it releases their frustration but does not help the child. It also makes an interesting point about how parents are often too scared to discipline their child nowadays because they want to be their child's friend and fear the lose of their child's approval, should they chastise them.

Sorry, the URL isn't live - i haven't had time to follow SueW's instructions!

portal.telegraph.co.uk/family/main.jhtml?xml=/family/2001/09/08/fmsmak08.xml

I don't believe in smacking. But that's not really the question, is it? It's "should smacking be against the law?" My opinion is that it should not be against the law. There is already legislation in place to protect children from child abuse (not that it always works, but it's there). This law would criminalize people like JBR and me, truth be told, who have smacked their kids when at wits' end. (I've only done it a couple of times and it's something about which I'm pretty ashamed.)

Good publicity for the Scottish Minister, though, eh? Anyone a Simpsons fan? "Think of the children!" Actually, this seems to me the sort of legislation that would be proposed in some small liberal town in the US.

Tigger, what's your opinion on the revelation that Nestle and other companies in the food industry effectively vetoed government recommendations regarding vaccination for foot and mouth? Smacking government ministers.. I'm all for that.

Jj, the reason is that in Holland they vaccinated some 70,000 Dairy cows for F&M and the public there will now not drink the milk!, so the cows are now having to be slaughtered.

As for the First Minister, well as you say good publicity for him. I do admit to having smacked my children, when they have done something that neither reasoning or removal or priveledges will do. Not very often I might add, usually a shout or a look from me is enough!!, even works with my husband. There are some people who take smacking beyond their control, but what is worse and I have seen it is some people referring to their children by using the most revolting swear words and demeaning them.

I once caught my son standing in a field of newly calved cows, not a good idea and I did smack him then, but it may be my imagination but I find my eldest who is a girl far easier to reason with. Don't know if this is just girls or is it her being the first born?

Tigger, oh no! That's horrible (the Holland thing). It's the same as any other vaccination, isn't it? Thanks for being such a source of info .. I'm not a farmer and knowing what and who is right is confusing, at best.

We have, on two or three occasions in his lifetime, smacked our ds. All of these situations have been life threatening or potentially life threatening, such as pulling out the vacuum cleaner plug to insert his finger in the socket, getting a chair to reach the clip on the fire guard and climbing in with the fire, and undoing his seat belt while in a moving car! In these, and similar, circumstances I feel that a quick smack on the backside (one wearing a nappy!), along with a sharp word or two, gets the message across that this must NEVER happen again. With the powerpoint incident, he had done this several times before and we tried an explanation to dissuade him. I have to say he has not tried it again since the smack several months ago!

We don't use smacking as a routine part of his discipline. I don't think it should be illegal to smack

Message withdrawn

I can't see how the Government think they are going to be able to police smacking, so what's the point in making it illegal? If its done in the street then I suppose someone could report you, but what happens in the home no-one else sees. A child under 3 is unlikely to have the understanding to report their own parent!

Nice idea, but unworkable. However, I'm for it if it makes people think a bit more about what they are doing before laying in to kids. There are other effective forms of discipline.

My understanding was that this law was proposed after a father used the defence of "reasonable chastisement" (he thought it was reasonable, it seems) in a case in Scotland. He had used a stick to beat his child. I thought it was to spell it out in letters of fire to brutes like him that they will get a criminal record if they are caught doing this sort of thing.
I don't think smacking is a helpful form of discipline for a child of any age but I have smacked my 2 year old son's hand a couple of times when, like others here, he was on the verge of doing something really dangerous and it was quicker than explaining why and then removing the hand. It worked in that context but I still feel guilty about it - mainly because although toddlers are fast-moving I ought to have anticipated the danger.
Others are right to say that this law is unworkable in the context of occasional smacking in the home but it does help ensure protection for small children whose parents lay into them and then claim they thought it was appropriate. Good for the Scots, ahead of the English yet again on law that benefits the young.

Bloss, the Bill going before the Scots parliament will ban smacking of under 3's as well as banning hitting a child of any age on the head, with an implement or shaking them.

My daughter came home from school, just before the holidays and said that such and suchs mummy and daddy use a belt if they don't do as they are told. Now that to me is just diabolical in the year 2001. I do not agree with hitting a child of any age on the head, and you do see people doing this. I really would hate my children to be scared of me, I do a very physical job on our farm and I'm very strong so my husband says! But I would never ever use my strength against my children. The child that my daughter was talking about is so disruptive in school it is untrue, and to my mind I think he is attention seeking for some affection.

A good idea, but realistically unworkable in law. One more deterrant to some parents, but also good publicty for the Scottish minister. I suppose that's my view in a nutshell. I have smacked both my sons on occasion, and yes, like others, I do feel guilty afterwards. And as others have said, smacking a child when you are feeling out of control is another thing to smacking a child when you are not. As is regularly smacking, or doing so once or twice in your child's life.

In a crisis, I think a light smack can be a first reflex if you sense a young toddler is walking into danger. In this situation, a smack can be equivalent to a hard push or a shove. And this makes me wonder, if you are going to ban smacking and shaking, should you not also ban all other rough handling?

Another thought, on very rare occasions, I use the threat of a smack to disciplin my oldest son. And he will take this seriously. If this legislation was extended to all age groups, I could no longer do this. Firstly because I know it's no good threatening children with a smack, or anything else, unless you are prepared to carry out the threat. Secondly, I assume it would be illegal to even threaten to smack?.

Seems to me that smacking in anger is out because you may not have the control to temper the hardness of your smack, and this could actually cause serious injury. And smacking in 'cold blood' when you are calmer several minutes or more later (in a sort of 'wait till I get you home and then I'll smack you) seems to me to be gruesome! By then, you can reason and talk, surely. I think it should be made illegal, for children of all ages, as this sets the tone. It says that as a society we do not think smacking is an appropriate way to discipline children. In Denmark(or was it Sweden?), I think I read there have been no prosecutions for smacking, though one imagines they have laws against physical abuse, just as we have.

The case that provoked this was not the stick incident, but a teacher who pulled down the clothing of his nine-year-old daughter in the dentists waiting room to make her go for treatment. In fact, as she was nine, this would not be illegal under the proposed law.

I know there are times when a toddler will place himself in danger and you need to act quick! You remove him from the danger - why smack? Why is hurting a small child ok to make any sort of point? You can do just as much with a yelp or a grab away, and then explain, as far as you can, afterwards.

I smacked our eldest, once or twice, but I haven't done it with the other two, as I took a conscious decision that this was not something I wanted to do any more. I don't think parents who smack are awful parents - there are lots of horrible things you can do to kids that don't involve smacking, so not smacking doesn't make you any better than anyone else. But there is no evidence that it makes 'better' children, or that children who aren't smacked are 'worse'.

Just had another thought. Sometimes I really feel guilty about how much force I have to use to get our unwilling, back arching, crying, wriggling 2-year-old strapped into his car seat or pushchair.

I am sure this physical clash has a stonger impact than a light slap over a nappy, yet how many times do you see other parents trying to restrain their children in public? It tends to provoke looks of sympthy from one parent to another. Without doubt, the same degree of force, if used to slap a child, would provoke an entirely different reaction.

However, I do think it's fundamentally wrong to slap children. It's not just a physical thing, is it?

Tiktok, that's just it for me-- I don't agree with making laws you don't plan to actively enforce just to set the tone. The thing that seems to happen is that the laws are selectively enforced. For example, if a policeman in a "nice" area saw some well dressed woman whose child was having a fit smack the child.. not terribly hard but enough to change the dynamics of the situation, do you think he'd do anything? Then.. if the same thing happened to a not-so-well dressed woman in a scary part of town, do you think the policeman's reaction would be the same? Especially if, for whatever reason, he had decided she looked like a troublemaker? Bad example, sorry, but it's the best I can think of without writing a novel!

I know that's cynical and can see your point about wanting to send a message that smacking is wrong. I just think it should be a social thing (ie you don't believe or condone it and people know that) rather than a government thing. And yes, the government should be "of, by and for" the people, but it just doesn't seem to be, sometimes.

Like others here, I used to occasionally smack but gave it up a long time ago. The emotional toll is too high a price to pay.

However, I doubt this law will stop those who believe in or want to smack (although the law will also apply to childminders, nurserys etc, which I think is a good thing).

I'd be more impressed with a government that instead of wasting money on an unenforceable law used it to to help educate parents in alternative and effective methods of discipline and parenting.

In Australia, or at least in NSW, it is illegal to hit a child (any age) with anything other than an open palm, anywhere other than on the bottom. I'm not sure how this is inforced, but the law's there just the same!

I read with interest some of the comments yesterday. I have not really sat down and thought will I or won't I smack my child. As a child myself I was very seldomly smacked. I am just sure for myself at least that it is entirely unneccessary.

A couple of the examples given surely highlight this. Someone said they didn't really smack but on occasions were driven to for the safety of the child, eg sticking (repeatedly) fingers in sockets. I just don't agree with that. I mean, what if your child was at school or somweone else's house. A teacher is 'in loco parentis' yet if Mrs Smith came up to you and said little Susie kept sticking her fingers in the socket so she grabbed her (to remove her from danger) amd smacked her I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be saying 'oooh, thank you very much'. Likewise if you were out and little Susie ran away and made towards a road a stranger saw her, grabbed her away from the curb and slapped her. Again, I don't think you'd be saying thank you, and I don't think you'd accept their arguments that a slap is the only thing they'd understand.

and if a lack of comrehension or time to explain is the main argument for slapping someone - ie a child - to save them from danger - imagine you're on a foreign holiday and you go to cross the road and forget to look 'the other way' first. If a local grabbed you away from the road and slapped you, you'd no doubt be furious, and never accept his argument that as he couldn't speak English he had no alternative but to hit you. You would no doubt think it was totally unjustifiable for hiom to hit you, and hitting you didn't teach you anything about road safety, but more that the locals are over the top and violent. Why is it ok to hit a child for something if you wouldn't think it ok to be hit yourself for the same thing.

If I was in B&Q and I went to touch something not realising it was dangerous and my husband (or an assisstant) slapped my hand or bottom I would be furious, and so would most people I think.

Sorry for the long winded rant but I just don't accept the majority of pro occasional smacking for their own good's arguments.

Incidently, complaining about a law because it's unenforcable... well, I won't get into that one right now

I don't really have views on smacking one way or the other. But surely the point is that in certain circumstances (i.e. about to touch a hot bbq, step out in front of traffic), the implications of such an action become immediately apparent and able to be understood by an adult or an older child but not by a toddler. As it is impossible to make a toddler understand exactly why for example they must not step out in front of a car, occassionally drastic action such a smack may be called for?.

I have to say if a stranger grabbed my child out of danger and part of that physical contact involved a quick reflex slap, it would not bother me. I would just be very, very, thankful that the stranger had saved my child.

However, had they slapped my child after the danger had passed, simply as a punishment, I would be pretty upset.

I doubt that making smacking under-threes against the law would mean much as I can't see how this law would be effectively enforced. However, I am fundamentally opposed to smacking. As a child I was smacked on a relentlessly regular basis and was also hit with handy household implements. It made me fear my mother and made me a very obedient child but out of fear - nothing else. I didn't respect or love my mother for her smacks but hated her for it.
Personally, I cannot understand the need for smacking. If you smacked an adult you could be up for assault. How can smacking a child be justified? If your child is about to do something dangerous it is just as quick to grab them out of the way than try and smack them. Our son has tried to put his fingers in plug sockets and I have snatched him out of harms way pretty fast and with little ceremony, but what would be the point of hitting him.
Also, how can you explain to a child that hitting other children and people is unacceptable but that it is OK for you to hit them, even if it is in 'exceptional' circumstances.
I would much rather see Scotland's First Minister introduce parent and teacher classes which covered effective discipline techniques for the under-threes than a ban on smacking, which somehow seems a bit of a token gesture.

Message withdrawn