Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Behaviour/development

Talk to others about child development and behaviour stages here. You can find more information on our development calendar.

To Smack or not to Smack

239 replies

Tigger2 · 09/09/2001 12:33

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?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Rozzy · 22/03/2002 22:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Rozzy · 22/03/2002 22:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Ailsa · 22/03/2002 22:49

Sometimes I do think about doing that, but, then I talk myself out of it. I'm not sure I'd know what to say or do, I've always been a get on with my life sort of person.

Maybe I'll think about it again, or maybe I'll actually do something this time.

Just remembered, because I had such a good Social Worker, when I was at school and having careers interviews, that was one of the things I said I wanted to do.

Rozzy · 22/03/2002 23:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Batters · 23/03/2002 08:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Charisma · 23/03/2002 09:25

Hi everyone

I have not logged on for a couple of days and this thread seems to have kind of spiralled into all sorts from when I last looked at it. Perhaps I need to elaborate a bit more on my "smacking" policy. Basically there are rules on behaviour in our house which as far as is practical are clearly laid out. For example, if you don't eat your vegetables, no desert, and no telly before bed if homework in not complete. Similarly the rules on when they will be smacked are also laid out. Usually, it is for things like running out onto the road, using dirty language, and hitting one another. So it is one of a number of different methods used and like any other can only be effective if the child knows you mean what you say (so do not say it, if you are unlikely to use it). Also, I do not smack if I did not say I would do it so there is no confusion.

Needless to say, my rules are adjusted as the childs level of understanding improves so for example, my 7 year old now values his pocket money and can reason better so the smacking option is used less now and only for extreme offences. And witholding pocket money is now more effective for the offences that were previously "sorted" by smacking. My 5 year old on the other hand does not for example value pocket money so witholding his has no effect at the moement. The psychololgists amongst you will probably say that witholding pocket money is also damaging and perhaps damaged you in some way!!

Lastly, some of the ages mentioned are horrifying to me (but then so is my smacking my boys horrifying to some of you!!). Smacking 2 and 3 years olds, in my opinion, is not effective as they often do not necessarily relate the smack to the action, and at this stage ,in my experience, it is counter productive (in the nappy changing situation, a pat on the hand to me was more of a distraction rather than a lesson in smacking, and I'm sure was effective!).

I also disagree with whoever it was that said that how can you teach children that violence is wrong when you hit them. Was it you sas2? Like you all, I love my kids dearly. I do not use dirty language but they have learnt dirty words somehow (I blame a child at school). My kids are learning to follow rules - not learning how to hit. You could use the same arguement for taekwondo, judo or other similar lessons. Isn't that violence? My boys attend classes, and have learnt alot about respect and discipline, and kept fit at the same time!! Should these classes be banned?

My boys are older than many of your kids so I suspect you may change your views in a few months/years. However, the rules in our house on smacking are so clear that often my sons tell each other as a warning BEFORE the other one commits the "crime" that is punishable by smacking. I DO NOT smack out of anger, and I do not break the rules. So it is as much an exercise in demonstrating to the kids that action A will always result in punishment B. And I do this consistently, i.e. the rules do not change if we are out so whoever suggested that people who smack in public are likely to be close to be murdering their kids in private is barking up the wrong tree!!

My advice is,if you are unlikey to use any method consistently, cannot recognise when your child has outgrown a method, or feel uncomfortable about a method, then DO NOT USE IT. Smacking is but only one option. I use it in conjunction with other methods, and I do not expect to be smacking my 7 year old for much longer as his sense of reasoning and logic has developed to the extent that smacking is no longer necessary. Hence the explanation for our not smacking/hitting adults. It is illegal yes, but even if it weren't in my opinion it would be unnnecessary as there are other methods that are effective at this age.

Hope this clarify a few points. And Bloss, if it works for you in a way that you feel is helpful, then hang in there. It is child abuse when it is misused. Never smacked my kids in anger.

Bets regards all

bloss · 23/03/2002 09:29

Message withdrawn

bloss · 23/03/2002 09:55

Message withdrawn

robinw · 23/03/2002 11:21

message withdrawn

Charisma · 23/03/2002 11:44

robinw, you are spot on!! Even if one copied something from someone, it might not necessarily have the same result in their children. So just like parents, children are individuals too.

Eulalia · 23/03/2002 12:10

Yes I think that is a good point bloss - children are not adults and they should understand that there are many things they can't do. I don't mean being oppressive of course. For example I never snatch things from my child - I always ask him to hand them over and most of the time he does. Being overly strict just results in crushing of freedom and resentment. However if you have asked them to do/not something and they clearly contradict you then some kind of discipline is necessary.

Charisma - I also disagree that 2/3 is too young for a child to understand they have been naughty - I mean for example a 3 year old can follow many commands, can go to the toilet themselves etc and a much younger child can understand cause and effect. Perhaps with having older kids you have forgotten (no offence taken with this remark I hope)

Charisma · 23/03/2002 13:38

Eulalia, no offence taken. I just felt that 2-3 is too young for them to understand that the smack is as a result of a specific severe action on their part and might be confused as to why you are hitting them.

ScummyMummy · 24/03/2002 01:41

Children can't do as adults do because they're little and don't have the necessary skills. They're dependent on us, in slowly lessening degrees, until adulthood and beyond and we have to look after them. This does mean that, to a large extent, different rules for adults and children are inevitable. As Bloss points out as an example, Mummy can cross the road on her own and little children can't be allowed to do this for safety reasons. But our children aren't going to be dependent on us forever- all the time they're drinking in our actions, looking at us as role models, learning from us what it is to be an adult. We have to keep them safe as they grow, taking account of their level of development, and guide them into coping well and humanely with this difficult thing called life. I think that, as the key adults in our children's life, what we do and how we act- in general terms but specifically in terms of how we relate to and discipline them- has a huge and lifelong effect on our children. So we have to (and do- what else is Mumsnet for?!) think a lot about the kind of people we'd like them to be and the values we'd like them to have and whether these are reflected in our own actions. One of the things I would like my kids to learn is that, ideally, adults don't hit to solve their problems or vent their anger. That's one reason why I don't smack them. In contrast, I have no problem with them seeing me crossing the road safely- one day I want them to do that for themselves!

A separate but related point- I also think that being a dependent child is very difficult sometimes. It's not always great to be in the power of an adult- to be prevented from biting your brother when you're very angry with him, to hold mummy's hand crossing the road when you'd rather play in the traffic, to go to bed at 7 when you're "NOT TIRED!" while your mum taps her thoughts onto Mumsnet till the wee small hours, to be dragged kicking and screaming to school, to be made to take French when you hate it, to be held to a curfew when you want to stay out all night etc etc ad infinitem. It's obviously our job as parents to enforce these sorts of things for our children's long term good but I think that the more benevolent, understanding and gentle the dictatorship the better. We need to aim for our kids to see the reasons behind our rules as soon as this is developmentally possible for them. IMO, smacking children for bad behaviour doesn't help too much with their understanding of WHY the behaviour is wrong.

Charisma · 24/03/2002 08:35

ScummyMummy - in the same token, children do not see their parents sent to stand in the corner as a punishment, but that does not mean it is not an effective method. Are you saying it should not be used?

On the point of crossing of the road, the key lesson for the child is recognising that they can cross the road safely. And this decison is yours, not theirs. How you let them know that they are ready to do so or not will vary by age and other circumstances so a smack may not be necessary if the first time they are exposed to a dangerous road is when they are say 13, but could be relevant for a 4 year old.

Tigger2 · 24/03/2002 10:47

So, Undiscovered, my son giving my daughter aged 6 and he is 5, a blackeye, I should have talked to him. The little horror, and he was last week for some strange reason!, laughed when I told him it was wrong to hit her, so a swift smack on the rearend was given, he then went on his own and apologised for hitting her.

I do not agree with smacking as par for the course, my mother did, even if I looked at her the wrong way, so I don't use it very often, I have found with my son, taking his tractors away and not letting him outside with my husband on the farm a far better way of making him realise he has done something wrong. Only thing is then if he is stuck in the house then so am I, aghhhhh!!.

Interesting point, on the Breakfast News this morning, Estelle Norris is to announce this week that parents are the problem where disruptive children are concerned. I do think that the lack of respect from SOME youngsters nowadays is terrible, a lot of them don't even say please or thank you, or excuse me when they want past. What do other Mumsnetters think of Estelle Norris comments? I must admit, mine always say please and thank you, 9 times out of ten without being prompted by me or my husband.

OP posts:
jasper · 24/03/2002 11:54

Problem about a discussion on "smacking " is not everyone is talking about the same thing. Some people in the anti smacking camp do not make a distinction between the kind of smack Bloss is talking about and the kind of abuse someone described when they saw a wee girl being hit hard across the face outside a shop. These are not one and the same thing. Sorry to point out the obvious but this point really does get lost in the debate sometimes.
I am in Scotland and have followed the recent debate with interest and some of the antis do their case no good at all by failing to distinguish between a Bloss smack and hard physical punishment. Worse still they insult the intelligence of parents like Bloss by suggesting THEY might not know the difference and that in some way Bloss' occasional smack is the thin end of the wedge which could lead to child battering.
The concept of banning smacking by law seems to me to be ridiculous as parents who thrash the living daylights out of their kids, as well as being cruel and unfit parents are already breaking the existing laws on "reasonable chastisement" and will not be deterred by legislation.

JoAnne427 · 24/03/2002 12:30

Definitely against "smacking" - was raised being hit with hands, brushes, hot wheels tracks, anything within reach, often not even knowing why. Not the way to raise a confident child.

As a result - I have sworn to never use physical force to instill what I wish to instill. That being said (dd is 11 mos. old - this hasn't been tested!), I have read this thread with interest, as I realize I do not know the scenarios I am going to be faced with (dd hitting me to test her limits, or - horror of horrors - her hitting another child, etc.) I also know that in my case, it was not gentle smacking to keep me from dangerous situations, but on abuse of the power an adult has over a child.

But Iwill go forward still believing that I can teach her/protect her/discipline her without smacking...and know that this is all a work in progress...

Jasper - I agree with you - such varying degrees of perception of what is being discussed - when I hear the term "smacking" it immediately brings to mind some memories that are not necessarily what others here are referring to...

JoAnne427 · 24/03/2002 12:37

BTW Jasper - congrats on the new family member! Hope all are well...

Rozzy · 24/03/2002 20:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

ScummyMummy · 24/03/2002 21:17

Charisma- I was trying to make a more general point really, about considering what we hope to achieve when we discipline our kids, whatever methods we may use. Personally I don?t think that standing my kids in the corner or smacking them would be particularly helpful ways of getting them to understand WHY I had found their behaviour objectionable. They?re both usually used as methods of punishment and I?m not entirely convinced that people learn to behave well through being punished. I guess that is partly to do with my own experiences as a child. My mum was usually very keen to EXPLAIN to us kids where we were going wrong when we misbehaved and to encourage us to rectify the situation where possible and apologise if not. I remember her explanations and advice in response to some of my immature/challenging/mean behaviour to this very day. The very fact that she was often able to empathise with my unacceptable actions while also being clear on why they were unacceptable meant a great deal to me. I think that the best discipline encompasses this sort of teaching and this is what I aspire to with my own children. I also remember a few occasions when I was smacked/shouted at but, in contrast, I have little idea what I?d done to merit this- ie I remember being smacked and feeling hard done by but NOT what I did and why it was ?wrong?. It?s not that I feel these smacks were abusive in the slightest- I think Ailsa and Jasper are absolutely right to make a distinction between a light smack and abuse- it?s just that I didn?t learn anything from them and they made me feel defiant and miserable. While I respect other parents? choices of disciplinary method and totally accept that there are much worse things than an occasional smack, I?m glad smacking wasn?t a routine part of my childhood experience and I don?t want it to be part of my own children?s experience.

robinw · 25/03/2002 07:29

message withdrawn

Rozzy · 25/03/2002 08:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Tigger2 · 25/03/2002 09:53

Rozzy, yes I smacked my son, because it was a totally unprovoked attack, and in that situation I did what I thought would get the message through to him. I don't go around smacking my children willy nilly, as I said further down taking his enjoyable things away has far more of an effect. But, giving his sister a black eye, or biting her until he draws blood, in my eyes are totally unacceptable behaviour from my son who is 5 and really knows better.

OP posts:
Rozzy · 25/03/2002 10:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Batters · 25/03/2002 10:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.