Anti-Smackers Wanted

[Xenia]

As a long term lobbyist against smacking children, spanking, slapping, etc etc whether a "little tap" or anything, I know there are lots of anti-smackers on Mumsnet too.

If you do share that view then respond to this consultation
www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/definition-domestic-violence/dv-definition-consultation?view=Binary

on that issue - where it talks about violence against those under 18 there is no reason at all why the bill (which in some aspects I do not accept which is why I happened to be looking at it) should not be a great vehicle to get all smacking banned, not just smacking which leaves a mark which is the current ridiculous English law and is a typical British fudge.

You can respond direct to the consultation and/or ask your MP to take a particular stance on it.

On the other proposals in the consultation I would be against legal changes as there is too much scope for abuse of the proposed new law.

Also find comparing employee adult/employer adult relationship to a young child/parent relationship pointless they are not even remotely the same. My boss pays me to be compliant undertake what is required shall I just start paying my dc to do what is expected? no because that would be ridiculous, different situations require different approaches and as to the alternatives of a smack, most people I know that smack do so as a last result of all other channels being tried and failed.

I have three sn kids, two of them will wander blithely into roads. It has taken time and effort, to explain that this is not safe. Unfortunately, because they have AS, they can repeat the theory, but find it hard to implement it. At sixteen, ds2 was nearly run over last week, I was with him. Funnily enough, I didn't hit smack him. I never have. We'll get there, it's just going to take time. A parent using a smack, even if it is for a last resort, is a lazy parent. Yep, I said it. It is a parent at the end of their tether, who cannot or will not think things through. You smack your child for running into the road because you are scared. You are scared because you comprehend the dangers involved, and smacking the child is to stop said child doing it again. It doesn't always work, so what happens next time? You smack said child when it goes into the road every time, it's not teaching the child the dangers of going into the road, it's teaching the child that Mum will hurt it if it does go into the road.

Dawn - your damn right, I smacked my DS once because I was scared of him being run over. Really lazy parent me, maybe I should just have asked him nicely again not to do it please and when he did it again and got flattened I could hold my head high and say "well at least I never smacked him".

I know this isnt about me, but in my case if he does do it again I wont be smacking him as it obviously hasnt worked, however he has gone from thinking its funny to telling me that we need to be careful near the roads. Im happy that in your case explaining worked for your three children, but in my case it just wasnt.

I can assure you, what with me knowing my DS and you not knowing him, that he does now appreciate the dangers of the road (well to the degree that a nearly 3 yo can) and does not see it as the place where mum batters him.

what about a wife then, rootie? dh isn't paying me and he does sometimes despair at my untidy habits- should he be allowed to smack me as a last resort?

Molly, it is very difficult to find statistics that separate out toddler traffic accidents from other age groups and naturally impossible to separate out other factors such as attitudes of drivers/state of roads/number of cars on roads; fewer children do die in traffic accidents in Sweden, but obviously that could be for all sorts of reasons.

Still, there has been a general decrease in traffic accidents among children in the whole of western Europe over the last 30 years; if the safety argument of smacking held true you would expect that decrease to be offset by an increase in accidents in those countries which have stopped smacking.

Personally, I don't see why you can't just restrain a toddler, either by reins or holding onto their hand. I've never seen an individual toddler who cannot be restrained if you hold onto them (and ignore tantrums, naturally)- it would have to be a toddler that was bigger and stronger than me, in which smacking probably wouldn't be a terribly effective means either.

Why do the smacking supporters always think non-smackers are wimps who spend their time nicely telling their children please not to do something in a sweet ineffectual voice. I don't do sweet and ineffectual. I don't do smacking either.

cory, the point i was trying to make is that imo you cannot compare a child/parent relationship to any other kind of relationship be it wife/husband employee/employer etc because they are entirely different relationships with different expectations. As for "Why do the smacking supporters always think non-smackers are wimps who spend their time nicely telling their children please not to do something in a sweet ineffectual voice. I don't do sweet and ineffectual. I don't do smacking either." I dont think that at all, and is a bit of a generalisation, and in the same way I could reply, and i am not suggesting this as fact, that "why do anti smacking supporters always think smackers are angry, lacking control, lazy parents who won't try any other methods?"

There is something inbetween the UP parenting brigade and the smackers!!
On the odd occasion that I have resorted to a smack I have seen it as failure on my part. It isn't OK to smack-full stop. (if you do resort to it when scared-e.g. running in the road-you can at least apologise and explain when you are calm again).

Dawndonna, your case may differ from mine as your DC have SN, but at 16, if my son was still running into the road, I would seriously be questioning my parenting skills and at 16, wouldn't be relying on hoping in time the message would get through. But as i said, as your DC have SN, this may differ.

Whatever the relationship there shouldn't be the expectation that the bigger and stronger can hit those who are smaller and weaker-just because they can get away with it!!

Rootie Trust me, it differs. As I said, they know the theory but can't implement. This particular incident, we were half way across and a car, which was travelling way to fast for the road, came round the bend, he didn't know what to do, had a panic and started to cross, I grabbed his hand at the right moment, but I was able to predict what he would do. Got him across and told him that he was safer to stay put as he couldn't judge the time, distance, speed equation other than on paper. It'll take a few goes, but we'll get there.
It's hard for him, he's very bright academically, but as I said, implementing the theory is very different. This is fairly typical of Asperger Syndrome.
If my 27 year old, at that age (not SN) was still doing it, then yes, I too would be questioning my parenting skills. However, I did manage it without smacking him too.

Cory - I was having a bit of a laugh about my request for stats, but if they are difficult to find, how do you know your statement is true? Do you also have stats about the general descrease in RTA's among children as in your post above or are they difficult to find aswell?

And I did restrain him, he had one of those back packs with a lead on it one of the times and I had his hand the other time but he waited until I was seeing to my neice in the buggy before making his great escape. Please tell me how you can restrain a toddler from running into the road when you dont know he is going to run ito the road? As for the tantrums well he tantrums alot of the time which I generally ignore anyway so that wouldnt have bothered me.

"Why do the smacking supporters always think non-smackers are wimps who spend their time nicely telling their children please not to do something in a sweet ineffectual voice. I don't do sweet and ineffectual. I don't do smacking either." Where has this been said?

Exoticfruits, thats not the expectation in my family, i cant speak for other families. In my family, I find it appropriate to teach my DC that there are things that are properly done by some people but that other people are not allowed to do.

Before having DS I was a nanny for many years. I never had a child run in to the road, not one in all the years! If you can't manage to control and restrain your child near the road I would suggest that it is maybe you who needs a smack. I don't normally agree with Xenia but in this case I do. While I don't think the occasional smack does much harm, I don't think it does much good though, I think there is too much of a grey area when it comes to what is smacking and abuse.

Exoticfruits, thats not the expectation in my family, i cant speak for other families. In my family, I find it appropriate to teach my DC that there are things that are properly done by some people but that other people are not allowed to do.

I don't understand the point. Do you mean that it is appropriate for you to hit your DC but not for anyone else? Meaning that no one can hit anyone else but parents have a dispensation because they gave birth?

(sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick and you meant something else)

What i meant was that in our family smacking was not seen as someone bigger physically bullying someone smaller, but as instant punishment by me as a figure of authority (and i will also add very rarely used, i can count on one hand how many times I have smacked my dc) for severe misbehaving. This was usually in addition to a lengthy telling off/why behaviour was not acceptable. However just because i did smack my dc, my dc understood this was a punishment and was able to distinguish the difference in that he did not equate smacking to him being allowed to go out and start hitting people as he saw fit.

I struggle to understand why a 2yo should be expected to remember "I must not run in to the road or I may get hurt/be smacked" when an adult can not remember "I must keep hold of the reigns/get the baby out first/walk a different route so my child does not run in to the road"

So does that mean that it is OK for you to do this but not his grandparents, the school etc? (not that the school can-but if it could)

For me personally, I can smack my dc and when GP's were looking after him, he knew that they had authority to discipline him. He also knew that anyone else other than them was not allowed to smack him. I guess in the same way he knows who is allowed to cuddle and kiss him.

see this is why there will never be a senbsible debate about this, theres far too much obtuseness (if thats a word) and "well it never happened to me".

And Moonface, it only takes a split second for this to happen. As you havent experiened it I can see why you have posted about walking a different route etc. I too have very simplistic views of situations that havent actually happened to me.

cory we shall never have a resonable debate with people bring up farm hands and putting up you tube photos with people being assaulted

Some on here think they no better how to raise other peoples children like I said I more shocked about the amount of mums on here let their children watch adult movies and 18 rated films much more damaging than a slap on the Hand when you were 5

By the way Mrs C needs to be told that it is against the law to use an implement. People who smack should go and read what the current law says. There is not a free for all. You can assault your child but it must not be actual bodily harm.

in my view if the slap or smack hurts, if there is a red mark on the leg, if you use an implement etc you commit a criminal offence .

The posts by the smackers on the trhead hardly need the anti smackers to make their case at all. The smackers make out the case to ban smacking really, even that gentle non effective smacking which remains the only lawful kind in the UK.

The more intlligent the parent and the more middle class the less likely to they will resort to any kind of smacking or violence and surprise surprise the better our children do.

Ouch, Xenia - while I agree with you about outlawing smacking altogether, I do balk at this statement:

The more intlligent the parent and the more middle class the less likely to they will resort to any kind of smacking or violence and surprise surprise the better our children do.

I think it's a blanket statement which can't possibly be supported by hard evidence (not smacking = kids do better ) and comes across as outrageously bigoted.

Children from higher income brackets are statistically more likely to do better than those from lower income brackets because they've usually had better opportunities from the word go. Also, the middle classes certainly do not have the monopoly on intelligence. Or, indeed, intlligence.

Surely actually explaining to your children the consequences of their actions instead of just hitting them would actually save time in the long run MrsCrafty? Therefore saving more of your precious time that can't be wasted actually talking to and educating your children?

Always makes me laugh when someone pipes up that screeching and swearing at a child is more damaging that a smack...as if the smackers are speaking calmly and politely to their children while everyone else is verbally abusing them.

Its not an either or situation - you can not smack your child and not shout and swear at them!

Sorry, Xenia, whilst I agree with the not smacking thing, Mother was a headteacher, father a GP. Got the crap beaten out of me, regularly.