Would you ban smacking? Take our two-question-takes-less-than-10-seconds poll (and be entered into this week's comp)

[carriemumsnet]

Tomorrow Parliament will debate whether to outlaw smacking completely. The current law allows parents (and some carers) to discipline children using "reasonable punishment" but outlaws punishment that leaves physical marks or causes mental harm. The last attempt to impose a full ban on smacking was defeated in 2004 .

We've put together a quick (and we mean quick) two question poll to see what Mumsnetters think about this and will hopefully be able to make your views known to the world first thing tomorrow.

For more info on the story click here

Everyone who takes part in the poll will be entered into this week's competitions to win one of 3 sets of Walker picture books worth £100 each, a week's luxury ski accommodation in France or one of 4 Fisher-Price doll and stroller sets. For more info on comp prizes click here

And just in case you need the poll link again it's here

Once you've done the poll please add your views on the subject here (as if mumsnetters need any encouragement to make their views known ).

Thanks

MNHQ

assault, sorry . Would have to be the word in bold!

I would want to know more about the guy who did that research though.
Given the strong pro-physical punishment attitudes among various elements of Christian fundamentalist America, it's not impossible someone might be determined to produce a piece of research to show a ban on smacking makes it increase.

by twinklelittlestar.....
"I think people who wish/desire to hit children and who justify their wishes/actions by saying that they were hit as children & 'it never did me any harm' is actually very sad as it is an indication that they were in fact damaged as individuals as they now cannot see any harm in hurting others (specifically children who are the least powerful members of our society)."

wtf????? seriously are you for real?

that is the most ridiculous statement i have read on mn in ages.

I was smacked, and have smacked my children, however i do not wake up in the morning and think, what shall i do today???..... i know i will hit my kids....

people who think along those lines, have severe problems, and take out their insecurities as a adult out on weaker, smaller individuals ie, children. this is disgusting, but sadly, because it is done on the whole behind closed doors, there is normally little that can be done.

however the posters on here who have admitted to smacking/tapping/hitting or whatever you would like to call it, have done so out of love for that child, and too stop greater hurt or damage from happening to that child.
in that instance the parent is taking responsibility for their actions, and is not acting out of malice.

to label someone who has smacked or has been smacked as damaged, is ludicrous, in some cases when smacking is to gain some sort of sick pleasure from seeing their 'victim' in pain, then yes i can see your point, but to suggest that posters on here are disturbed is quite frankly very very wrong.

My mother smacked me.
She didn't beat me.
It has damaged our relationship.

For what it's worth... i was in the park with ds after school today.

A little boy pushed his baby sister off the slide and his mum shouted at him and smacked his bottom.

Ds watched, turned around and said to me "why is that little boys mummy hitting him? Does she not love him?"

Out of the mouths of an innocent child, one that has never been smacked.

Podrick - quid hoc, ergo propter hoc?

Might it not be that she would have damaged your relationship with her anyway? I'm assuming her smacking was not done occasionally and within a context that made you feel loved and respected...

Don't children say the darndest things.....

Kathy... I think it's quite likely that this guy is pro-smacking as a legitimate form of discipline, but what he is saying in his booklet is that it is possible that anti-smackers also have an agenda, and make their case without considering the evidence.

He calls for an unbiased examination of the stats, facts and figures (i.e. I'm guessing not by him, and not by someone from an anti-smacking campaign), but I doubt very much whether it is possible to be unbiased on this subject. His main point is that we shouldn't just assume that everything is now peachy in Sweden because of the ban on smacking, and seek to emulate the law in this country without a full examination of all the possible consequences.

Has anyone been watching the world's strictest parents? My point, in response to bansleybelle's son's cute comment, is that sometimes children do not recognise that discipline can be loving.

The teenagers in the above programme all start the week ranting and raging at the parents, how they don't let their kids have a life, are 'power mad', want to control everything etc etc. And by the end of the week the teenagers inevitably come to see that what they thought was abuse (i.e. lack of "freedom", no dating, forcing to do housework, etc) is actually a very loving and effective form of parenting. And I'd bet my bottom dollar (if they are as 'fundamentalist Christians' as the families appear to be in the programme) that their kids got a smack when they were defiant, disobedient toddlers.

Dottoressa - "I'm assuming her smacking was not done occasionally and within a context that made you feel loved and respected..."

how on earth could smacking ever be done in this context? Sorry but that is beyond my comprehension.

..and "loving discipline" - yes but "loving physical discipline" - warped.

Inflicting physical pain on your child is a) unecessary b) unconstructive and c) lacking in self-control by the parent - I personally find it abhorrent, as do most people, and that is why few people dare smack their children in public. Shame they carry on behind closed doors. I can understand lapses in parental self control but that doesn't make it right. Smacking is physical abuse and is completely lacking in respect for another individual. It makes me cringe. You do not need to smack your child to have a well behaved and well adjusted child and the fact that you know some latin and still decide to smack your child is no mitigation.

Podrick, well written, and my thoughts entirely..

It's interesting that lots of people have talked about 'inflicting physical pain' on children. I was smacked occasionally as a child, and I can't remember it EVER hurting.

The most frequent occasions I can remember are when my father would get cross with us bickering at the table (happened quite often ) and would take us into the hall to spank us.

I have no recollection of any pain. I do remember thinking 'oh, I've really done it this time' and being ashamed of my behaviour.

But physical pain? Nope. If the pain stays with you long after the event, then it's been done too hard, imo. There's a big difference between the sort of smack that gets your attention, sharpish, and the sort that actually hurts.

oh and in case anyone is wondering, I have a great relationship with my parents, including my father, and couldn't have wished for more loving, supportive and caring parents.

LittleMyDancingWithTheDevil how can you say that there was no pain associated with smacking? It is not "tickling" or "stroking" after all????

A clap in the air would get your attention after all. It's about hurting a child, not getting their attention.

I'm sure it hurt at the time, although I was never hit hard - what I mean is that I have no memory of any pain.

The pain is not what has stayed with me about the punishment - but the realisation that my behaviour had gone too far has.

As someone who is anti smacking, i don't really understand if it doesn't hurt then what is the point? What does it achieve? I was smacked by my mother and although it has not affected my relationship with her, the fact that i can remember the occasions clearly ( although i can't remember other things) proves to me it has stayed with me.

My children are well behaved and polite and confident, all achieved using discipline methods that avoid smacking.

A smacking ban along will hopefully encourage those parents who do smack to look at the many methods of discipline that are far more effective.

Reading back through the posts a large number of mums who have smacked either regret it or agree that it achieves little in the long run.

I can't speak for anyone else and why they smack - but I would be very very offended at anyone who suggested that my parents were ever motivated by a desire to hurt me.

But you agree that it probably hurt at the time... It's common sense, you smack, it hurts.

I for one could never envisage myself inflicting any type (no matter how small)of pain on either of my children.

In the days of your parents smacking was the norm, they probably did not consider that there was another way. You could smack your kids in public without a mass of onlookers who felt horrified.

Things have moved on. How much public smacking is there now? Do you have the conviction to smack your kids in public, or only behind closed doors?

I don't think a smacking ban will do that at all, barnsleybelle. As you've already pointed out, most parents on this thread who have smacked their dc's are already of the opinion that it's not the most effective form of discipline, and do try to use other forms instead.

So how would a legal ban change things for them, apart from criminalising them?

People who do actually harm their children are already covered by current laws. So what exactly would this law achieve?

Besides, legislation shouldn't be used to recommend forms of discipline to parents, or send a message - that's what education campaigns are for.

Laws don't exist to tell you the best way to live, they exist to tell you at what point you MAY NOT behave in a manner that will hurt someone else.

Seeing as the negative effect of smacking has not been demonstrated in any way, this is no place for legislation.

In all honesty I need to exit this thread - it makes me feel physically sick.

And barnsleybelle that is YOUR choice as a parent. Noone is telling you that you must smack your children.

But nor do you have the right to legislate how other people bring up their children, if they are not causing them physical or emotional harm, then it's noone's business at all.

Podrick - I have already said that I've chosen not to smack my children if I possibly can avoid it. I have smacked DS once, and it was in my own hallway. I don't know if I would smack him in public, as it's never arisen.

But in terms of my parents - to suggest that people who smack are motivated by a desire to hurt their children is completely missing the point. They are motivated by a desire to stop them behaving in a dangerous manner or to get their attention when the child has lost control of their own actions.

Podrick - "Dottoressa - "I'm assuming her smacking was not done occasionally and within a context that made you feel loved and respected..."

how on earth could smacking ever be done in this context? Sorry but that is beyond my comprehension."

The very fact that it is beyond your comprehension is clear evidence that you suffered far more than an occasional smack as a child.

I think LittleMy's posts are the sanest thing on this thread - realistic and undogmatic.

(And I don't apologise for knowing my Latin! What did that jibe have to do with the smacking debate, anyway?)

My point however is, how do they know it's not causing them physical or emotional harm?

Surely if it doesn't "hurt" then why bother?
I also think mums hide behind the argument that it's to stop them behaving in a dangerous manner. Many parents who choose not to smack still have children that misbehave, do potentially dangerous things and lose control of their actions. There are other ways to control this without striking out. In my honest opinion it's not about what the child has done, but about the parent losing control of their own actions.

Would you condone a teacher smacking a young child if it was acting dangerously in the classroom? ( not being antagonistic, just interested and enjoying the discussion).