Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Beware - could be contentious - Smacking Bill - For or Against?

204 replies

JoolsToo · 02/11/2004 16:18

They're trying to get a Bill through Parliament today to outlaw smacking altogether in Britain.

Your views anyone.

fyi - I'm agin it (the Bill not smacking) (oh what a surprise )!

OP posts:
aloha · 03/11/2004 16:46

And this has nothing to do with wanting to be friends with your children.

Uwila · 03/11/2004 16:48

So when is Little Angels on. I NEVER have time for telly so I probably won't get to watch it. But, I'd like to....

Caligula · 03/11/2004 17:09

I think Aloha does make a good point - would the pro-smackers be happy for a teacher or a nursery worker to smack their child? I ask because I once had this situation with an au-pair. I hadn't told her not to smack the children, because to me it was so obvious that she shouldn't, but I realised that she was smacking them and it showed me how far our attitudes in this country have changed; for her, it was a normal method of disciplining a child, but for me, it was something I felt only a parent should do, if it was going to happen at all. But thirty years ago, most people thought teachers needed to be able to smack children, and people of my mother's generation still think they should be able to. The law changed before attitudes did. Same with equal opps laws.

tallulah · 03/11/2004 17:40

My biggest concern about all these sort of Bills (& particularly to ban smacking) is that they never offer an alternative. I was smacked (regularly!) as a child, and so was DH. When faced with our first child misbehaving we did not know of any alternative ways of sorting her out. (There was no Little Angels in 1987!)

If you are going to try to change the way people act, offer them an alternative and TEACH them how to do it!!

My DD was like those twins that were on the other week from the family of 5 kids- constant screaming & constant tantrums. She then went on to be like the 8 year old Indy from another episode. Everyone blamed it on her having 3 little brothers. I begged & begged for help from the GP, every HV (& ended up in "family therapy") but no-one suggested any of the things they show now on that programme. I feel quite angry that things for us could have been so much better had someone been prepared to offer some practical help.

There is more to the issue than dictating to people what they are not allowed to do.

hercules · 03/11/2004 17:47

That's just like the gov saying babies should be bf exclusively for 6 months but not providing the necessary support.

Pagan · 03/11/2004 17:53

Georgina A and Sabine J summed up what I meant. Does sending a loving caring parent to prison for a tap on the hand make for the best outcome to a situation - no! Will introducing legislation stop parents thumping their children in the privacy of their own home where there are no witnesses to report them - no! Will the court system be jammed by further bureaucracy thus preventing genuine cases from being heard - yes!

This is a very contentious issue and there will always be those who believe that smacking is OK and those totally against it. It is too divided for any Government to make a decision on.

Uwila · 03/11/2004 17:54

Yeah, as if it's there choice how I feed my baby.

GRRRRR

Sorry, sore subject.

Uwila · 03/11/2004 17:55

Go Pagan!

hercules · 03/11/2004 18:12

Do people really think that if this bill went through then any parent who smacked would end up in prison? There are lots of people who commit all sorts of crimes and dont go to prison.

JoolsToo · 03/11/2004 18:18

the question is - what WOULD happen - anyone any idea? Or haven't they planned as far as that?

OP posts:
JoolsToo · 03/11/2004 18:18

the question is - what WOULD happen - anyone any idea?

OP posts:
hmb · 03/11/2004 18:24

Compulsory parenting classes? After all they have been so effective in reducing antisocial behaviour, not! Another case of a good idea not funded or properly supported.

This legislation was never thought through

misdee · 03/11/2004 18:27

maybe they'd fine us. oh dear.

i agree, that if they want smacking to be made illegal, then offer parenting courses, free help books, free helplines etc etc. time outs do work, have been doing them with dd1 lately as dont want to smack as it has no effect on her, she will just scream back at us if we shout etc etc. but i know that a year ago she would've been like lisalisa's dd and scream for 3hrs. she has done it b4, and that was with a nap inbetween as well. that day took it out of me.

pixel · 03/11/2004 18:42

I smacked my ds a few months ago and I know I was right to do so. He was in the trailer behind dh's bike and started trying to stick his hands in the spokes of the wheels. As he has asd he didn't understand my attempts to explain by moving his hand away and saying "no". I did this about 10 times and he just laughed and pushed his hand in the spokes again. So, I smacked his hand and he cried for about 2 mins then forgot all about it and enjoyed his bike ride. But he's never done it since.

Should I have let him have 2 mins pain and crying and learn a lesson, or should I have let him chop his fingers off?

Obviously he would never be smacked for doing something he didn't understand was wrong and normally he would just be removed from the situation or distracted but I reserve the right to smack him again if it's for his own safety.

I know it's a bit of an extreme example but I'm just pointing out that you can't say 100% that there is NEVER a time when smacking is appropriate. As a loving and responsible parent I know that I would only do it if I was convinced it was the best course of action in a given situation. Should I be turned into a criminal for it?

BTW social services seem to have enough trouble helping children who are seriously abused and often use the excuse that they are overworked when a child (eg Victoria Climbie)is found dead despite being on their registers. How on earth will they find time to investigate reports of smacking, especially when there will be no real evidence apart from the word of a 'witness'.

Caligula · 03/11/2004 18:43

I think Tallulah and Hercules have summed up how I feel about this bill. I'm anti-smacking as a rule, but I do feel that if a government wants to ban one of the oldest and most traditional methods of disciplining a child, then it has to re-educate the population in alternatives, and provide proper support. It's just not good enough to say don't do this, but not provide any support for an alternative.

And to be fair, many people don't want to smack their children, they just don't know about alternatives.

aloha · 03/11/2004 19:15

But anti-smacking laws do appear to work in several other European countries. The prisons aren't full of parents, but there does seem to have been a reduction in levels of child abuse and injury. I agree, sometimes the law has to be changed to change attitudes - as with equal opportunities legislation and seat belts.

sarah33 · 03/11/2004 19:29

I remember as a child being smacked for misbehaving and looking back at what I did then I feel my parents were right to do so and I certainly have not been mentally or physically scared by it. I feel the police would be better spent arresting real criminals not parents who are trying to bring their children up properly.

enid · 03/11/2004 19:34

oh aloha, you are so good at saying stuff!!! I agree totally with your last point.

motherinferior · 03/11/2004 19:49

Coming back as I said I wouldn't to this thread, to back up Aloha's point - in Sweden, since the introduction of anti-smacking legislation (backed up with a public programme of promoting alternative methods of discipline) child deaths at the hands of parents have fallen virtually to zero. Which they certainly have not here. Yes, most parents stop at a certain level of smacking. Others don't.

And actually I think state intervention in some things isn't that bad.

ScummyMummy · 03/11/2004 20:29

Lisalisa- I definitely echo the advice to have a wee watch of Little Angels if you are having tantrumming times in your home. Tania the great would sort your babe out in no time, I'd hazard. (Big fan.)

My opinion is that being smacked sucks and therefore I am doing my best to avoid being a smacker. I think the House of Lords have a mean age of about 100 and have therefore filtered their own experiences of being hit through many hazy memoried layers of nostalgia for the good old days. In short, they've forgotten that being smacked sucked then for them and sucks still for kids now.

sis · 03/11/2004 20:41

Yep, I agree, the wonderful Tania on little angels should be compulsory viewing for all parents-to-be with annual refresher viewings! She is fantastic and so much of her approach seems to be common sense with the benefit of hindsight!

Uwila · 03/11/2004 20:48

When is Little Angels on?

Caligula · 03/11/2004 21:10

Uwila - you've just missed it! It seems to be on on BBC3 at 8.30pm some nights, but I'm not sure exactly when. It is definitely on tomorrow night.

I have to say, it (along with Mumsnet) has completely changed my approach to discipline and my kids are now much better behaved. (Though still horrors! )

tigermoth · 03/11/2004 21:28

I am not totally against smacking. But if it really is true that in countries where smacking is banned, incidents of child abuse have fallen significantly, then it's right to ban smacking here. No argument. Not banning smacking simply for smackings sake, but because it deters child abuse.

Tinker · 03/11/2004 21:35

Found this on google which might be of interest.

Myths about the campaign to ban smacking

This is a debate which raises a number of anxieties and questions. Some false allegations have also been made about the effects of banning smacking, and in particular about what has happened in Sweden in the twenty years following the outlawing of smacking. A detailed review of the available Swedish data has been published on behalf of the Alliance by Save the Children UK and is available as a PDF file on the website of the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Some of these findings are given below, in which we seek to clear up misunderstandings.

Outlawing smacking:

would not lead to the prosecution of parents for trivial smacks ? any more than adults are prosecuted for trivial assaults on other adults. On the contrary, clear reform coupled with education is likely to reduce the need for prosecutions through changes in parental attitudes and practice. This has happened in Sweden, where there has been no increase in prosecutions for parental assaults of children since the ban (the strongest decline being shown in relation to parents in their twenties ? who were themselves brought up without smacking).

would not lead to more compulsory social work intervention in families or removals of children into care. Again the Swedish experience shows a marked decline in out-of-family placements of children and of compulsory forms of intervention. The grounds for social work assistance, care orders or supervision orders under the Children Act would be unaffected by legal reform.

would not prevent parents from using physical measures to protect or restrain their children, nor absolve them of their duty to teach children good manners, the difference between right and wrong, and how to behave thoughtfully and respectfully towards others. Indeed, one can anticipate greater use of positive, consistent and effective forms of discipline as a consequence of such a ban. (A recent National Family and Parenting Institute poll found only one in five parents believing smacking was an effective way of teaching right from wrong).

would not be a "pointless" or "unenforceable" measure. Although there is no increase in official state intervention in families, there have been significant changes in attitudes and practice in countries which have adopted a ban. A majority supported smacking in Sweden before the ban, now only 6% of under-35 year-olds support even the mildest form of physical punishment. On the other hand, there is no evidence that physical punishment will disappear of its own accord. The prevalence of corporal punishment in the family, including "severe" corporal punishment, remains very high in the UK. Recent Government-commissioned research involved interviews with over 400 families. It found that 97% of the four year olds were physically punished, almost half more than once a week. Three-quarters of the one year-old babies were smacked in their first year. Almost a quarter of seven year olds had experienced "severe" punishment by mothers (defined as involving "intention or potential to cause injury or psychological damage, use of implements, repeated actions or over a long period of time").