Smacking 'does no harm if a child feels loved': do you agree?

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello.

We're wondering how you feel about new research that suggests smacking does children no harm as long as they know it is for the right reasons and feel loved.

The publication of this study - which focused on teenagers, it must be said - is causing quite a stir, with, according to the Telegraph, 'parenting groups and charities [reacting] angrily to the findings, [and] maintaining that a child can suffer long term damage from physical discipline'.

In Britain, parents are not banned from smacking their children but it is illegal to inflict injuries causing more than a temporary reddening of the skin.

So, do you agree that smacking is fine, as long as it's tempered with a backdrop of love and affection? Or do you think that smacking is never the answer? Please do tell.

thanks for the link, it does work.
There's a lot in the paper about the culturally specific group the research looked at and they compare the results to other cultural grouops known to use 'harsh discipline'.
What they measure in the teenagers is the degree to which they 'externalise', nothing else (like how happy they are). Now, I'm not sure what is meant by this and they don't explain it, although they do say that it was measured by maternal report, in olther words they asked the mothers what they thought about the teenagers.
A quick google suggests 2 meanings for externalising-

1. tendency to project your own bad qualities onto others, eg seeing them as violent/aggressive when that is really how you are yourself but you deny it to yourself
2. directing 'troubled energy outward' by behaving in ways that are violent, bullying etc

I gues they mean 2. In which case, the research is saying that, in a culture where violence towards children is the norm, if children feel (even just a bit) loved by their parents, as far as their parents are aware, they don't engage in violent behaviour themselves. Which is a LONG way from saying 'smacking does no harm' It might be what readers of the Telegraph amongst others want to hear. But IMO, this research is only useful for people who are or are working with families where violence is a cultural norm, which doesn't include most of the people on MN I'm guessing. Even then, I think you would have to look much deeper at the consequences of that style of child rearing to conclude it 'did no harm'.

I've never felt that it has damaged me being smacked when I was child. It was something that I was told would happen if I did X again and was not something that was suddenly sprung on me. It wasn't for everything I did wrong, usually if I was going to do something that would put me in danger (running about near a busy road, playing in the kitchen when things were cooking, etc.) I do remember, however, being about 8 and realising that the smack didn't actually hurt and so my parents realised it was no longer working as a form of punishment and had to use different methods. By that age though, I would have been able to understand why it wasn't safe to do those things.

Having said that I can remember very clearly 2 or 3 occasions when I was hit in anger. Speaking to my parents now, they were racked with guilt when it happened and it still sticks in my head. My sister and I both fought like cat and dog when we were younger and I have been known to smash things and lash out violently when I lose my temper even now (not at people - usually at pillows or cushions). I don't know if this is something I've learnt or if that's a natural response to the emotion of anger (other animals lash out violently so maybe it is a combination of nature and nurture).

Having recently become parents, DH and I had this conversation a few months back when something was in the news and DH is VERY against smacking as a form of punishment as he believes his aggressive temper (again not violent towards people at all but has been known to occasionally punch walls, smash things, etc.) stems from being hit as a child.

We won't be smacking our children but that said, I don't understand the argument, you wouldn't smack an adult. You wouldn't tell an adult off for doing things at all as you would expect them to understand the consequences of their own actions and make a decision accordingly whereas children are gradually learning about the world and becoming aware of their place in it so need an adult to make those decisions for them.

Oh, and what Sparklyboots said.
My Dcs are all in their 20s/late teens, I have not used violence or the threat of it to discipline them, nor emotional manipulation, pretty much as SB describes. They are in no way feral nor ever were. Polite, considerate, pro social, empathetic. And very untidy.

I was smacked excessively, it harmed me. When my mother calmed down she'd tell me she only did it because she loved me. Smacking was acceptable when I grew up so nobody questioned the extent of it and my mother could minimise it to other people.

She was not a bad person, just one that needed more help than she got.

I won't do that to my children, I may lecture and be overbearing to them, I try not to but the truth is that I lack parenting skills because I never learned them by example.

snorbs i appreciate your point but its your idea of good parenting. just because its your belief doesn't make it right or wrong.
Good parenting surely is doing your very best for your children as you see fit to bring them up loved and secure and helping them make their own way in life.

someone who uses a light smack for discipline doesn't follow is a bad parent.

what about smokers who pollute their children's lungs or parents who farm their kids off to nannies whilst hardly spending anytime watching them grow up..... i am not having a go at anybody's parenting merely pointing out that as long as the child is not physically harmed there are worse things you could do.

I fall into the category of light smacking when i was a child and now this might shock you but......

i am not scarred by it.
i don't think its acceptable to go round hitting other adults.
i know it would be wrong for my husband to hit me or vice versa.
i have a great relationship with both my parents even my dad who hit me around the back to the calves with a wooden spoon once.
i was lightly smacked it didn't get harder or more regular as time went on and lead to abuse.
i do not remember ever being lashed out at or have more pain than a mild sting and it certainly made me consider my actions far more than being sent to sit on the stairs (the naughty step was in our house over 30 years ago) which lets face it was just a mild inconvenience and not something to be feared at least to me!

i would be that i am one of millions of children who fall into this "yes i was smacked but never hurt and only with good reason" catagory.

The question about adults with learning disabilities is a very good one and I would love to see it answered. Because it is a very good and extremely relevent point if the argument is ability to understand. Isn't it?

My sons are 12 and 13. They have no sense of danger. If, when they are 30 and 31, they run into the road because they have no sense of danger, is it ok for me to grab them and smack them?

If it is not - then why would it be ok for me to do it when they are 2 or 3 or 4?

It's not a ridiculous argument or comparison, not at all. It's just difficult to answer!

My Dad used physical violence on a regular basis - I was smacked (usually round the head, which really hurt) and sometimes kicked as far back as I can remember until I turned 16. He never apologised. It's done me plenty of harm, to the extent that at times when my little DD does something naughty, I have to mentally restrain myself not to hit her.

I actually think smacking teenagers does more harm to them than children (which I think is harmful in itself), as when you're a teenager you're struggling enough with your place in the world as it is. Having a parent who can hit you when they feel like it with no repurcussions is massively confusing, feels very unfair and humiliates you. I also think teenage girls (possibly boys too, I don't know) who are exposed to physical violence at this age when they're trying to judge the kind of man they want as a partner in the future are probably more likely to pick partners who are physically violent. Certainly happened to me.

As far as my experience goes, smacking does harm.

Apologies for my recent silence. Went off to rl and didn't realise I had upset anyone! Bof has explained why I had trouble with it. It is very triggering. And now about to go off again, but hopefully the issue with the name is now not the subject of the thread.

I have never been anti-smacking and feel the evidence comes from the ministry of the obvious. My parents smacked me and I never feared them and always knew I was loved (although my father did have a wicked temper). A lot of the time my parents did not even check themselves and say "was that proportionate" they would just do it.

I have smacked my children in the past (with the eldest it is now getting less frequent as he is capable of understanding rules and consequences), and I don't feel guilty for it and I know it hasn't damaged them - they are both still extremely naughty at times and completely at home with telling me how I should be doing things. I am pretty sure that this is not the sign of damaged children!

I do see it as no worse than a time out (which is mostly completely ineffective). A parent needs to do what works for them and sometimes it is a smack.

I think there are MANY alternative ways of dealing with behaviour you don't want to see in your children. I just don't understand why you would need to smack children!
I couldn't bring myself to hit anyone, it has never crossed my mind.

I also think that for very young children it is a confusing message. Parent tells them not to hit people because its bad, but yet the same "role model" is hitting them.
In my experience as a teacher I have seen a few reception age children hitting others. When questioned about it they have actually acted exactly how the parents would, they hit a child who was doing something wrong and they struggle to understand why they are the ones in trouble.
I appreciate that this isn't what all children would do, but still, food for thought!

Like many things, the answer is not black and white. Ongoing violence, smackings and beatings are obviously harmful to children and teenagers. However, the odd smack for older children, 5+, is not so bad. I think it can be better than outlandish shouting and screaming for example - which I believe has replaced smacking for some parents, now that smacking is so frowned upon, and can be worse IMO.

I used to be vehemently anti-smacking and I still am in many ways e.g. I believe babies and toddlers should never be smacked.

However, occasionally older children 7+ can really be a pain in the neck especially boys, and will simply not do as they are told. If you have tried everything else then I think the odd smack is not harmful IMO (though it should be rarity and obviously I don't mean beatings in any way either).

I do so hope that in the very near future enough people will say 'NO' to smacking and change the laws of this country. Marvellous to have opportunity for this debate and have read with interest the contributions here.

People power is a very real experience. It changes traffic and transport laws, installs zebra crossings, ensures votes for women and promotes equality issues, workplace health and safety conditions and ensures better workplace facilities for pregnant women; we can effect change. Either by the slow sure system the wood louse employs which eventually eradicates a chair or a building, or by persistent insistent supportive messages to those attempting to effect change for the better.

What a fabulous forum for debate this is. I look forward to reading more of your views.

If our highest thought is to smack our child/ren what are we understanding when we say the word discipline? My understanding is 'discipline' comes from the word disciple. I believe a disciple is a follower. If we wish our child/ren to follow our example, let us reveal the best in humanity not the worst.
I believe smacking is a pretty low level of communication, of teaching, we could reveal to our child/ren; not the best example to follow. As humans we will fail miserably a lot of the time. We will be embarrassing to our children and many seven year old children and teenagers will express hatred towards their parent at some point....And if we know that is normal, we can accept it and build on the relationship, not diminish their clear expressions with a smack. Show them we are adult enough and secure enough to accept their feelings, however extreme they are. They are children learning the ways of adults and those who love them.

There is no 'definitive' methodology for parents to follow. We fumble from day to day...that is our lot! The least we can do therefore is the best we can offer, not the worst. We can at least limit the damage, reduce the risks and minimise harm. Smacking never ever reduces harm; it adds fuel to a burning fire. Either the fire within the parent or the fire within the child.
And how very peculiar, to my mind anyway, that so much smacking is done behind closed doors and if we do see it happen, we are told to mind our own business.

If it's done in secret, the parent clearly cannot own their own behaviour. That is not very adult. Taking responsibility for what we do is part of adulthood. If it is done in public and we are told to mind our own business when we cry out, gasp and show concern for the child being hit, we can at least acknowledge this is a public place and the hitter has made it our business. Again the hitter is not taking responsibility for their behaviour.

We are our children's first role models. If we wish our children to choose well, let us at the very least help them with good enough role models in their upbringing. And because we are human we are imperfect and totally unable to be perfect, so let us be good enough at least. Smacking is not good enough. It is cruel, abusive and reveals a lack of emotional resources, a reduction of strategies available and can also be a cry for help from the floundering parent.

Even as we congratulate ourselves on not smacking child/ren, we perhaps also need to be aware of the parent who did not bring a child into the world to inflict cruelty, but ran out of ideas, support and emotional resources because of their own stresses and difficulties and lack of supportive ears and shoulders.

I am lucky, I was able to contradict some of my family's behaviours...I read books and watched different parents' behaviour and learned from them that which I wanted to do and that which I decidedly didn't want to do as a parent. Smacking children is illegal in other countries....people who hit their children manage to control themselves abroad, why not here?

Is there a fear of making it illegal in Britain as so many people think it's a human right to be allowed? ....to abuse? to hit? to demean a small person? Why cannot our governments acknowledge it is wrong. Why can't our law makers make it illegal to hit a child whether or not it leaves a mark...(how crass was that additional phrasing?) why can't our governments,health officials and education advisers come together in their wisdom and declare it is not in the interest of a child to be hit, smacked or whatever the term is.

Or are they, the lawmakers, the governments, the advisers the people unable to take responsibility for their actions? Are they the ones who cannot act as adults? Are they the ones who just cannot own that by doing 'nothing', by inaction, they are contributing to the harm exacted on our children.

Ooops sorry this was a bit long...excuse me...I am a first timer. I will learn concision as I develop.

Sorry somersetlady IMO You ARE scarred by your upbringing otherwise you wouldn't be arguing FOR smacking; it's the age old "it never did me any harm".

The unruly DCs one sees sometimes are often slapped too. Their parents tend to ignore them when they're being quiet and "good" but slap them when they're being a pain. Often it's the only way a DC gets attention (even if its negative attention) so they continue with the unwanted behaviour just to get a reaction.

Good first post rachaelmother

Excellent posts, Shallishanti, especially this:

"the research is saying that, in a culture where violence towards children is the norm, if children feel (even just a bit) loved by their parents, as far as their parents are aware, they don't engage in violent behaviour themselves.
Which is a LONG way from saying 'smacking does no harm'
It might be what readers of the Telegraph amongst others want to hear. But IMO, this research is only useful for people who are or are working with families where violence is a cultural norm, which doesn't include most of the people on MN I'm guessing".

I'm always saddened by the defences people present for hitting their children. All the "he pushes my buttons" remarks could equally be applied to those irritating old folk with dementia - but we show little sympathy towards those relatives who do hurt their elderly relative, and rightly so. In any case, if you are the sort of person who thinks it's ok to have buttons, I guess you feel you're kind of special. The rest of us presumbly don't have buttons, or at the very least ours aren't as sensitive as yours? It does make the adult sound like a weapon primed to go off at certain triggers.

My children are adults - they weren't hit, but they were shown boundaries and I was firm about things which mattered. They're happy, responsible, loving people and not at all undisciplined.

Having children isn't a right - you don't just invite these people into your lives and then proceed to hit them in order to make them fit your lifestyle.

I don't want DD hitting another child over a toy or when she doesn't get her own way. I ask her not to do it, that it hurts them and is unkind. So what message does she get if I then smack her for misbehaving? Even if it doesn't leave a mark, it will be thing she remembers. There are better ways to teach our children how to behave and respond when angry.

I thought this said "smoking not harmful" and was soo happy!

I have never understood the 'you wouldn't smack another adult' argument.

It's as if there is no different rules, social acceptances, between adults and children.

I wouldn't let my child, drink alcohol, smoke, do drugs, have sex, drive a car, Watch porn or inappropriate age films. etc. but an adult can.

Adults and children are not equal. (herein lies the problem)

Having worked in YOI and colleges, it is really hard going annoying to have to come from a postion, where they think YOU need to respect THEM.

It's not just about smacking (sits firmly on the fence) it's the complete lack of respect some children have and the way they are consulted on adult topics (moving house, picking schools)

It used to be seen as a pre-dominatly working class problem (discipline of kids) but you only have to watch 'the worlds strictest parents' to realise that middle-class parents are catching up fast, in being unable to control their children.

Too much child centred, shrieking at tough love, ie, cc, and guilt because the econony as to work full time imo.

Disclaimer. Not all working class and not all middle class - just the ones with this problem.

Awaits flaming.

don't duck! stand and take it straight on woman!

i would like to see that 'smoking does no harm' post too

i definitely feel more guilt about smoking than i do about having tapped a toddler hand when it was stuck in a friends video recorder for the tenth time running.

sassy34264 IMO and E DCs and adults are not equals but there's no reason to DISRESPECT them. Why shouldn't everyone be treated with respect? I have worked with DCs all my life and have always listened to them (i'm not perfect BTW but I treat people and DCs as I would like to be treated).

Why shouldn't the whole family discuss a decision as important as moving house don't the DCs live in the house as well?

I was against smacking until I watched Bedtime Live on Channel Four with the excellent Tanya Byron.

Children were beside themselves with tiredness and had upset and stressed their parents, siblings, and themselves with their inability to get to sleep for months/years.

Well, a quick slap on the bottom at the start of the 'problem', a sharp order of back to bed and a threat of another slap if they messed about and all that angst and missed fun, 'misbehaviour' due to tiredness, wouldn't have happened. Sometimes it is the best option imv. The poor children could have been labelled difficult or perhaps with ADHD when all they were was tired.

I'm not sure mn and my keyboard would cope swallowed because it is really a big bug bear of mine.

I was practically forced out of teaching crowd controlling, and now i have to argue twice as much with my 12 yr old dd, because i'm tough love and strict (probably not really) compared to other parents. (belly button piercings, watching 15 films, kitten heels, make up ) at 12

it's bloody hard work. I never smacked her growing up, and thankfully she was a goody 2 shoes who never pushed my buttons.

Where the hell did that child go?

Lots of interesting views on this matter.

When does smacking a child become abusive?

It's against the law to hit someone, if you did and they called upon the police you would be arrested and questioned/charged.

If you was hit by a police officer when you have done something wrong, that police officer would have to justify there reasons and suffer the disciplinary actions set before them.

So why the hell would it be seem a fair punishment when a parent smacks a child for misbehaving?

A tap on the fingers, a smack to the bottom, at what stage do we as society see this as abuse?

If a person you left you child with smacked your child whilst in there care because they had been naughty, that person would be deemed "abusive" to that child... So what makes it right for a parent to smack the child?