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

"The parents who abuse their children will continue to do so regardless of this or any other law."

In fact the evidence for this is absolutely to the contrary.
reports of physical abuse (and children recorded as being at risk) are on the decline, in large part because the tolerance of physical abuse is lower than it used to be. Changes in the law are responsible for this, in part.
if hitting your child becomes socially unacceptable, then it is lesslikely to happen.
like drunk driving.

I voted no. Because otherwise I would have to hand myself in. I have smacked DD for dangerous things - today for example she was about to poke her hand in a babies eye, I slipped my hand in and tapped hers away with a stern "no", we then talked about being gentle with little babies etc. She spent the rest of the time there being lovely to said Child. She later told me babies are lovely but too small

When I was naughty I got a slap and if I was at school I got the cane and a slap for getting the cane when I got home

Nanny state {angry]

As someone said on the radio this morning, outlawing smacking whilst letting parents nurture obese offspring is going too far. Raising your children to be totally unhealthy and overweight is a life-sentence you impose upon them. We can certainly dissaprove of something without banning it - that is a sign of a mature, sophisticated culture.

Yes to a ban IMO. I agree with fanjo (and lots of others). It needs to be illegal so it can be used for those that beat their children. Of course it won't be used for the occasional smack on bottom. I often feel like smacking my toddler if he's being annoying, but never would (I hope), and know it wouldn't work anyway and would just teach him that violence is the answer.

I have smacked my DS1 twice for scratching his ds2 as a newborn, and I was wrong, it did none of us any favours and didn't stop him going on to hurting his brother.

If it were illegal maybe I would have thought twice about hitting him in the first place.

and that surely can't be a bad thing.

i have smacked.it doesnt work and leaves all involved feeling worse than ever.i get to the point(very rarely i must say!)when it feels like the only answer,but ofcourse its not.if it was illegal it wouldnt feel like that.
(do i now sound like evil bad parent???)

Hmm - a sharp slap on the hand, or a serious scald from boiling water??

So am I going to be traced and prosecuted with retrospective legislation then, having given my email address 'n' all?

All they need to do is use the current law properly and issue clearer guidance on the meaning of "reasonable chastisement". Anything else is just political manouevering IMO.

I have smacked my 2 year old a handful of times. Not proud of it, don't think it really works and have only done so as a last resort. But even if it takes him aback and makes him laugh, it distracts him from attempted electrocution or whatever else life-threatening activity he had embarked upon.

I just don't get it - when a child is in a dangerous situation and about to do something that will harm them, you pull them away, don't you? I've done it countless times with DS and never felt the need to smack him - moving him away from the danger is top priority, I can't see how a smack would help at all.

I admit I have felt the urge to smack him and that is in situations like some of those described here, when he's really hurt me (pulling hair, poke in eye etc as toddlers do) - and I'm really glad I've resisted because it's clear as day to me that that urge is about my own pain, rage and frustration. Smacking would be inappropriate with a toddler who hasn't even done those things deliberately and doesn't understand.

I'm not judging people who have lost control and done it and regretted it - but don't try to justify it by saying it's necessary to save a child getting hurt. What utter twaddle.

Oh I'm loving all these perfect parents here on Mumsnet. Where are you all in real life that's what I want to know?

I seem to recall I said I don't think smacking really works. At least I'm honest enough to admit my failings as a parent (which undoubtably are many).

Once again, banning smacking would be utterly stupid. Tighten the definition of "reasonable chastisement".

I'm not perfect. I don't think we all have to be perfect to have an anti-smacking law (after all as I've said countless times we have it for adults, and we seem to cope - no one is proposing reversing that law just because it gets broken. Most laws do, you know).

And I can't guarantee that one day I won't lose it and smack. Maybe DS just hasn't driven me mad enough yet. But if it happens I won't try find some way to justify it - it would only happen because I lost control. Can children grow up to know how to cross the road safely and be careful around electricity and sharp knives without being whacked? I think they can.

I would agree with you (although I wouldn't equate a small slap on the hand with a whack). I was brought up with smacking, I don't like it, I think it's demeaning and having seen first hand that it doesn't work I don't plan to do it again if I can help it. But criminalising it would not have helped me to make that decision.

A real "whack" should not come under the defence of "reasonable chastisement" IMO. I think currently the guideline is whether it leaves a visible mark or something? If it leaves a mark that can be seen by a third party some time later then that's more than any smack!

Some people on this thread have said they sometimes feel like smacking their toddlers, but never would.

I couldn't agree more when it comes to toddlers. But it would be interesting to see if everyone who started out as a non-smacker had still never administered a single smack by the time their child(ren) turned 18.

Some of them would still never have been provoked to that point (lucky them). But I would suspect that it would be by no means all of them!

I just hope people are honest in the poll, even if they have smacked once or twice, as I have - othetrwise it will be worthles

Was going to do poll... but then felt deeply uncomfortable. Yes, I have smacked DD1 once or twice on the back of the hand in circumstances where her behaviour has been dangerous and I have run out of options (eg. her running off in a carpark etc.) Am not proud of it, and certainly wouldn't want to win a skiing holiday for admitting to it...

Hi I am really hoping that this law gets passed tomorrow. I think this should have been done a long time ago. I imagine if it doesn't all those on this thread who would like to right to hit their children will be rejoicing!

It really is sickening that so many people are coming on here to state that they want to maintain the right to hit/smack their children. It is interesting to read that so many of you think that a ban is being introduced to stop 'other' people abusing their children...rather than being able to reflect on their own behaviour & to see it is also to stop people like themselves using violence as a method against powerless members of our society... even if it is 'to teach/protect from danger etc.

LOL... i smack my dd so that she won't hit/poke the baby... can't you see how ridiculous this is. What lesson are you teaching here? That while the parent is around they wont poke/hit the baby as they are frightened that they might get a smack but when the parent isn't around it's ok as they have learnt that physical chastisements are acceptable.They would feel it was ok to smack/poke etc as they are being taught implicitly through the parents action that this kind of behaviour is ok as the parent is doing it to them. The parent is giving a very confusing message as they are saying on one level 'don't use aggression/physical intervention' against others but on the other they are showing that they do precisely this.

The lesson it is teaching is that it is ok to physically chastise those younger/more vulnerable & less powerful than themselves. They are learning how to get their own way through bullying tactics. (i.e. i want my child not to put fingers into a socket so i will hit them to teach them not to do it = if i hit someone weaker/less powerful than myself they will do what i want). Children learn through imitation/copying much more powerfully than they do by what they are told.

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).

So in a way they have learnt to dissociate from the pain & humiliation they experienced as children when they were hit. Rather now they have to believe that it didn't harm them in order to keep the view that they maintain of their own fragile selves & their parents (& parenting skills from crumbling).

Additionally I think that people/parents that have to resort to hitting their children for any reason whether it be in the name of safety, discipline or whatever are actually demonstrating the fact that they are inadequate as parents & as mature members of our society. It reveals them to be lacking in
maturity if they do not have any more effective parenting skills other than having to resort to smacking.

Perhaps most important parents who use any kind of violence/aggression (a tap etc) toward their children & justify it in the name of 'good parenting' are also revealing that they do not have a very close attachment to their children & that their children do not have a very close/healthy attachment to them as if they did they would not need/want to resort to these types of parenting strategies in the first place.

I will be so pleased if this law is passed as it will be a step forward to a more humane society:

'The best test of a civilsed society is the way in which it treats it's most vulnerable & weakest members' Mahatma Gandhi.

What are all you slap happy mothers out there going to do if you can't smack your children anymore? Get a tazer?

if this law doesn't get passed is this going to give the 'tappers' & 'slappers' the green light to smack/tap a little harder & not feel quite so guilty about it?

Nah, I'm planning to use emotional abuse myself - so much more mature.

Twinklelittlestar. In principle what you are saying is of course right but it is a little unfair to make such sweeping generalisations. I have never smacked my daughter, she is only 17 months after all, but I stand by my original comment (the first one of the thread I think). I can count on one hand the number of occassions when my mother reprimanded me in this way. It was a "tap" and nothing more sinister, never left a mark and certainly didn't hurt. It was more to jolt me, if you will, when I was having a tantrum and shouting at her. I certainly never felt humiliated and I totally resent the suggestion that my fantastic mother who did a wonderful job of raising five children single handedly is somehow no better than the sort of mother who routinely slaps, bullies and shouts at her children.
If you read the thread, most people who admit to have chastised their children feel dreadful about it so this "green light" nonsense is pretty offensive. Most parents are not child abusers, reserve your indignation for those who deserve it.

Excellent post, PuzzleRocks.

Thank you.

well sanity prevailed.

Now perhaps mumsnet would like to run another pole that says when did you last slap your child or how often do you slap your child?

It's nonsense to suggest that you are a poor parent if you have ever hit your child. If you resort to it regularly or beat them you have a problem.

I don't hit my children now because they are of an age to understand reason. I did so when they were small and I feel no guilt about it at all. They have no memory that they were ever smacked.

Twinklelittlestar do you have any form of punishment when your children misbehave? What is it? Or shall we be seeing you on one of the parenting programmes wondering why your children are such horrors that every other child avoids them.

Twinklestar - you seem to think that people against this ban are against it because they want 'the right to hit/smack their children', and you paint them to be monsters who are just waiting for the opportunity to beat up their kids, and would probably beat them senseless if the law allowed it.

Far from it. I have chosen to try not to smack my child, but I still do not support this ban.

I am against this law because I believe it is not a matter for legislation to get involved in, and that within certain boundaries (i.e. no physical or emotional harm) people should be free and supported to parent as they choose. Parents come in all shapes and sizes, because we are all people, just as children are all different, and there is not only one way to be a parent.

Some parents shout more than others, some parents use light smacking while others put children on the naughty step. To some children, the rejection and isolation of being put in its room is more upsetting than a smack. To others, being put in their room has no effect, but a smack on the hand does. To some people, shouting at a child is not acceptable - to others, smacking is not acceptable, but shouting is. The point is that as long as children are loved, supported and cared for consistently both emotionally and physically, the differences in parenting styles do not cause any harm.

We already have laws that expressly forbid physical and emotional harm, which is right and proper in a civilised society. We do not need laws that tell us what kind of parents we should be.

great post LittleMyDancing

"What are all you slap happy mothers out there going to do if you can't smack your children anymore? Get a tazer?"

I always like a well considered thoughtful post which has obviously read the other posts and absorbed them

I don;t want the right to tazer my child thank you.

I beleive that the exisitng laws are adequate and see no convincing argumetn of who is going to be caught in any new ban who deserves to be criminalised.

To those who said that the police wouldn't strictly enforce the law and therefore any parent "cracking" and giving their child a smack won't be prosecuted (nice to be so sure of that when I see cases of people being prosecuted for throwing gum in the street). Well the existing "reasonable punishment" gives that flexibility now - some people might not like the fact that reasonable punishment is not very clear but it does in fact give Police/DPP and courts the opportunity to prosecute those who deserve it.