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?

I know what you mean, Batters! I definitely fall into the over explaining trap all too often and I'm sure the boys get confused sometimes and just agree to shut me up.

But I do think they're capable of understanding simple explanations like "No hitting. It hurts and people don't like to be hurt." "Don't smear your yogert all over the table. It makes Mummy cross because she doesn't like cleaning it up." etc. I've tried to use this approach from a fairly early age although, like you, I'm not sure exactly when it becomes really effective.

Btw, when I said I didn't like the idea of punishing I didn't mean that I don't want to enforce good behaviour. I definitely do. I just don't like the "You did x so I'm going to give punishment y" approach. I prefer to try and involve them directly in mending the situation- eg Making them sit with me to calm down if they've hit/hurt each other and then getting them to say sorry; or making them wipe up the yogert they've just spilled. I also physically remove them from a situation/remove stuff they're using dangerously or irritatingly from them if they don't seem to be listening to my words of wisdom!

I was thinking about this thread in the car over the weekend in heavy London traffic and an analogy between smacking and using a car horn came to mind! Everyone was getting impatient and frustrated and beeping their horns angrily at the car in front when they failed to move into the milimetre of space made by the lights changing. Basically the car horn is there to say LOOK OUT, YOU'RE DRIVING INTO DANGER, STOP NOW! and I think that sometimes a very loud shout or a smack can be used effectively for the same purpose, as in your friend with the son who ran into the road, Batters. However, most people don't use their car horn like that at all- they use it because they are frustrated at sitting in traffic, because they're in more of a hurry than the car in front etc etc. I'm not casting any aspersions on people here- you've all been clear that you do not smack in this way- but I do think a lot of smacks and shouts that children receive are similarly unnecessary and born of frustration.

As you say, batters and scummymummy, it's so important to explain to a child what it is they are doing bad. Sometimes I too feel like a cracked record! I also like to make the punishment fit the crime: ie cleaning up the milk they spilt. I know that you have both got younger children than me, but here's what CAN happen when I try explantion on my 7 year old.

PS I realise that neither of you are saying you only explain without resorting to any other punishment.

When my son is being at his devil child worst (this happens five or six times a year) he will smirk when I tell him how upset mummy is that she's got to clean the kitchen floor again etc.

Saying 'I am sad, I am worried, I am disappointed because.....' brings attack of 'attitude' and dumb insolence, with a bit of name-calling thrown in for good measure 'stupid lady' is a favourite. This is a critical danger point for me. He is showing open disrespect for me. It is so tempting to give a single short smack, and yes, I freely admit it, to exert my power over him. I make myself use words instead, and firmly tell him to go to his room. But he refuses and still smirks. He weighs six stone, so there is no way I can carry him up the stairs. I might resort to a threat to phone daddy, which he hates, or his headmaster. This stops him in his tracks and I can then make him go upstairs to cool off. I hate making this threat. Bringing daddy or another adult in sends out the message that mummy can't cope.

So.... I have learned to cut the explanation if I sense the situation will escalate this way. Paradoxically, an ignored explanation makes tempers on both sides rise too much - increasing the risk of a smack.

I have found that rewards and the taking away of treats work far better for us. Usually my son is only too aware of how, why and what is wrong with his naughty action. Any further explanation happens when we have both cooled down.

I've been following this discussion without having the time to post. Just two further things to say: Jasper,I think you are so right about there being different definitions of smacking.

Also, lots of people have said isn't it illogical to smack a child for smacking another? What sort of example are you setting? Isn't the other side of the coin as follows: you are showing a child exactly how horrible it is to be smacked ie making the punishment fit the crime? Not saying this excuses smacking, just saying there is more than one way of looking at it.

I dont agree with smacking, we were never smacked as children and dont feel any need to hurt my son. If young children are unable to understand what they have done wrong how are they to understand they are getting smacked for doing something wrong? Surely smacking just gives them pain and in some cases fear, not respect or good behaviour. I know alot of people who were smacked as children and not one say it made any difference.

I can only go on past experience. I was smacked as a child and I hated it, it didn't teach me anything but fear and disrespect of adults. I agree that there are different types of smacking, but at the end of the day you are still raising your hand against your child, no matter how calmly you do it. It is not child abuse, but I still don't think it is right (just my personal opinion).

As I said, I can only go on experience, but my dd has also reached the 'hitting' stage, as most kids do, she is 20 months and I would not dream of raising my hand against her. When she hits me I will cry 'ouch!' and then pretend to cry, she'll then come and give me a hug. I think I am showing her that hitting hurts, just as when she falls over and bumps her head. If she sees the effect hitting has, she stops. This is all it is, she is just exploring the world and its boundaries, I don't think I can smack her for that! Also, I have seen how other parents have handled the 'hitting stage', the ones who smacked usually had a harder time in getting their kids out of this phase. I was at a house where the little girl (about my dd's age) was throwing her toys at the other children, so her mother smacked her on the hand, the child continued and the smacks got harder until the girl burst into tears and had a temper tantrum. I did think to myself, what was the point in that? The girl obviously didn't understand the punishment and was left feeling angry and upset at her mother.

I am sure you will all have different tales to tell, but this is how I see it. However I do respect other people's rights to discipline their children whichever way they wish

with this debate in mind, I decided to ask my son about his views on smacking when I collected him from school

I asked him,'say you leave your lego out. I tell you to tidy it away three times and you ignore me. I'm getting ratty with you and you know you will be punished. Would you rather I smacked you, sent you to your room or confiscated your gameboy for three days. In each case you would still have to clear up your lego. What punishment would be the worst?

He said taking away the gameboy is the worst, then being sent to his room, then being smacked. I said doesn't smacking make you unhappy? He said with a grin, it doesn't hurt and he'd rather keep his gameboy.

From this I conclude that for my son, smacking is the most ineffectual punishment of the three, but also the softest option.

I am saying this from the perspective if an older child. For very young toddlers and babies of course, I am more uncomfortable with the idea of smacking.

I asked my boys about this the other night, Tigermoth! I said "Do you think I should hit you if you do something bad?" One of them looked a bit aghast and just said "NOOOOO" and the other danced round the room singing "I'm being bad! Slap me! Slap me!" Wasn't quite sure what to conclude...

message withdrawn

message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

I certainly agree with you RobinW to a point. I will teach my child to walk away from violence wherever possible, even though I was bullied at school for the very same reasons. However with girls, it is less physical bullying and more mental. You could take your dd to self-defence classes to boost her confidence, the techniques they use are more about restraint than retaliation. Yes, they should defend themselves against violence, but I don't like fights, especially between girls. So I will teach her to either walk away, or to restrain the bully so that they cannot hit her.

This child is a bully for a reason, and I don't think that hitting back solves anything. I bet he is short of friends too. He must be a very unhappy little boy, I hope the teachers have realised this.

My dd likes to make her teddies do something like knock toys over or spill drinks, then she will gleefully hold them up and say "Naughty teddy! Naughty!" Before hurling them across the room, not something she has got from me I have to say!

It's not me I tell you!!!

Just out of interest, what do you all think of sports like Taekwondo, Judo, wrestling in the context of "walk away from violence"?

Also, in the same spirit, what do you tell your children about the likes of bin Laden and the Americans (& our response) to the attacks on Sept 11th?

Hear hear Rozzy, I don't like Taekwondo at all as a 9 year old boy used it on my 7 year old nephew and broke his arm in two places. Personally I don't think children should be taught those kind of sports, you can't trust a child not to use their skills inappropriately, they don't know any different.

Also I would set Sept 11th as an example to my child as to how revenge never works. The same as the Israeli and Palestinian attacks - how can killing innocent people be classed as revenge? In this world I think that America is the ultimate school bully, and poor countries like Afghanistan are their victims - not Bin Laden, he's the troublemaker that never gets caught.

Rozzy, I completely agree with you regarding 'our' response to September 11th. What the American government and the British government has sanctioned happened is not on my behalf... whilst I feel desperately for the victims of September 11th I also feel desperately for the victims of the aftermath. This war is not solving anything, simply confirming what the terrorists seem to have believed; that America (and Britain/the west) are a law unto themselves and make the rules up to suite themselves.

The martial arts thing is an interesting one. I believe in turning the other cheek. I also believe that smacking children is a futile exercise. However, my daughter lacked confidence and has found judo immensely good for her self esteem and developing body awareness. She is not aggressive but is doing extremely well at judo. I feel reassured that she has the confidence to feel that she can defend herself. Our toddler will be sent to judo when he is three for similar reasons but also because we believe that it is good mental and physical discipline.

Furthermore, on the subject of martial arts. I practice T'ai chi and it is a wonderfully balancing art but even t'ai chi can be used aggressively if one wants to. Children who use martial arts inappropriately are not following the laws they are being taught in their classes. These children, I would suggest, would use any means at their disposal to inflict pain on others... it just happens that they have learnt a martial art.

I still think there should be a law on martial arts governing children. Not all the classes are professional and often children do not know that the moves they are taught in the class, can inflict serious damage if taken outside. The boy who broke my nephew's arm was taken to Taekwondo classes by his parents as they wanted to teach him self-defence if ever he was bullied at school! He had already broken another child's jaw previous to my nephew!

There are lots of self-defence classes around that aren't that aggressive, I think there are even classes especially aimed at children. But it is a fine line to cross, not all kids are as considerate as our own, and a bully with martial arts skills is a scary thing indeed!

I'd always thought I was the odd one out in having misgivings about martial arts but it's obvious from these responses that a number of other people feel the same way. No doubt they are useful etc when practised responsibly but can one really expect a seven or eight yr old to be responsible all the time? My perception is that martial arts has become popular since the ?Bruce Lee films were made (back in the 70's, I think.) I don't regard teaching children to kick to be a particularly life enhancing skill, I must say, and to judge by the levels of violence on the streets these days martial arts are used offensively not defensively.

Message withdrawn

My 5 year old daughter told me her views on smacking today, to quote "children should not be smacked, one because it would hurt and two, because it would make them into a horrible person because they will copy". She has never been smacked.

To return to the martial arts topic, I think a very vital part of teaching any martial art to children (and I do think it should be restricted to over around age 7, depending on the child's emotional maturity), should be the values behind it. Like self-control and respect for others, a positive attitude, and an understanding of the place of what they are learning to do - ie it is not for the playground or to "show off" with, and should not be used aggressively, as a deliberate tool for harm to others. Self-defence is fine as long as they truly understand what it means! Btw I think the story of the boy who used his newfound "power" to rescue someone else from a bully is terrific!

And to agree with star, I think that hitting a child changes who they are. Respect is not the same as fear. If they are made to face consequences linked to their unwanted behaviour, they will learn from it; if they are merely punished or hit, they will learn fear and anger and "not to get caught". Children too young to reason with may need restraining in cases where they are in danger, but it shouldn't be an automatic response. I find it hard to believe that anyone who routinely physically punishes a child has never hit harder than they should have out of anger, "in the heat of the moment". IMHO, it is a dangerous (and in the long-term ineffective) method of discipline. Think of it this way - what are you going to do when the child becomes a teenager and a smack is no longer an option?