Smacking your child - Right or Wrong?

[Marc]

Todays hot debate fresh from the creator of "Is it right to Punch a Woman?":

BBC News tidbit:

Proposals to limit the right of parents to smack their children will be debated in the House of Lords later on Monday.
An amendment to the Children Bill seeks to ban smacking in England and Wales if it causes harm such as bruises, scratches or reddening of the skin.

The government has given Labour peers a free vote on the change - but has told them they must vote against another amendment backing a total ban.



forgot to say my 2 pence worth! anyway:

Not being a parent means I cant take a direct view of this BUT the way I imagine it is if my child done something very wrong then they need to be taught a lesson, if shouting at them does'nt change it then a smack across the back of the legs and sent to their room should get the message across....I would think! but again not being a parent its hard to judge, so its over to you Parents

 

[REDLAND]

what about the gobby shits that hang around outside McDonalds on London road, they need a damn good kickin'

 

[Mr Popkins]

SLAPPIN DONT GO FAR ENOUGH!!!!

BRING BACK THE RACK!

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Wrong. However there have been times when I have had an exhasperated swipe at their legs when they've been in the back of the pressure cooker (I mean car). It is the wrong lesson, no matter how tempting it is to take the route of immediate impact.




I witnessed this man biff his 8-year-old son (I assume) in the ear in a Bristol Chopping Centre - it was absolutely shocking. Different people have different ideas on what constitutes a smack I am sure.

 

[Yorkie]

A child should never be smacked in anger.

I used to warn my kids and then count to three before I ever smacked them. Then it was only for extreme defiance.

I had various punishments so a smack wasn't the only way (it was on the bottom or hand) for instance stopping pocket money was effective for my son.

If it came to a choice of my daughter sticking toys into sockets (we didn't have those safety covers in those days) when being told not to umpteen times and smacking her hand, then there was no choice.
I'd rather have a little girl crying because her hand hurt for a few moments than a dead child who had electrocuted herself.

I disagree with smacking their legs or around the head.

 

[CHAPPERS]

I don't see anything wrong with conditioning your child through violence, especially if he reckons that he's a BUMMER.

 

[Curious Orange]

We should make it compulsory for all children to be fitted with off switches.

 

[fatbadger]

Wrong. You can't smack an adult, so why should you be able to smack a child? Still, as Yorkie points out, sometimes there will be an issue regarding personal safety, in which case things are rather different. I also like your 'count to three' idea, Yorkie. If only everybody could do that when feeling angry, in any situation (including before posting!).

 

[Yorkie]

Wrong. You can't smack an adult, so why should you be able to smack a child? Still, as Yorkie points out, sometimes there will be an issue regarding personal safety, in which case things are rather different. I also like your 'count to three' idea, Yorkie. If only everybody could do that when feeling angry, in any situation (including before posting!).

Believe you me, there were times when I got to 2 and a half

My daughter became a good 100 metres runner when in her teens from running up to the bathroom where she could lock the door on me

 

[magoo]

I don't see anything wrong with conditioning your child through violence, especially if he reckons that he's a BUMMER.

Please be joking.

There is NO excuse for smacking children. It merely proves the parent isn't even intelligent enough to talk to a child let alone be a parent.

Those that have smacked a child will know the hurt they themselves feel immediately after a smack when looking into the childs eyes.

Violence only teaches violence.

 

[Rougvie]

I don't see anything wrong with conditioning your child through violence, especially if he reckons that he's a BUMMER.

Nah, you just put them up for adoption if they tell you they are WRONG.

 

[Spiros]

Yorkie - the 'count to three' method has held good in the Spiros household for a few years also. The only exceptions are extreme health and safety (like the fingers in the socket situation) or if bigger child has just walloped little child. I then use a 'toned down' version of what they have just done on the premise that if they don't like receiving it then they'd better stop dishing it out.

As much as I abhor anyone who uses routine violence against their kids, I fail to see how the new law is going to do any good. Those that want to beat the crap out of their kids still will - they don't care whether it's legal or not. Also, kids who have been shouted at or had a big argument with their parents may make up the 'they smacked me' stories to get back at them. Then parents trying to use non-violent ways of disciplining their kids will still get into trouble anyway!

 

[CHAPPERS]

Please be joking.

There is NO excuse for smacking children. It merely proves the parent isn't even intelligent enough to talk to a child let alone be a parent.

Those that have smacked a child will know the hurt they themselves feel immediately after a smack when looking into the childs eyes.

Violence only teaches violence.

Just to clear it up, I WAS joking.

I won't be able to answer the smacking debate until and if I decide to have kids.

 

[Yorkie]

It doesn't take intelligence to be a parent unfortunately, Magoo.

You do the best you can and hope for the best.

 

[Deano's Right Foot]

We should make it compulsory for all children to be fitted with off switches.

Yes please. A child-free break every now and then would be fan-jolly-tastic.

I think that (generally) smacking doesn't actualy achieve anything, and that it actually results in worse behaviour in the smacked child. Children and adults should both be protected by law from being physically harmed. [/B}

I try to keep in my mind my child psychology in a nutshell (forgive the generalisation):

- Children crave attention (good or bad) and will do almost anything to get it.
- Good behaviour needs to be praised (they get attention so they do it more)
- Bad behaviour needs to be ignored (they'll get bored and stop doing it if it's ignored)
- Totally unnaceptable behaviour: the child needs to know that this is not acceptable - calmly but sternly.
- If the totally unnaceptable behaviour continues then the child should be sent to and kept in their room (or other safe place) alone for a few minutes.
- Shouting, and (in extreme cases) smacking should be reserved for behaviour that is potentially dangerous to the child or anyone else.

Easy in theory, bloody hard in practice, especially if your child is at all "problematic". But in my experience this really works.

 

[Faldo]

The level of discipline met out onto a child should be at the discretion of a responsible parent.

Are all parents responsible?

No.

How to mitigate this?

All people who fail certain aptitude tests should neutered (for example; Big Brother viewers. Those that feel Burberry and Aquascutum caps are rather dapper. Croydon residents, etc).

 

[Lammy]

No being a parent myself but I can still speak from experience of being smaked within an inch of my life several times during childhood often with a plastic soled slipper!

Did it do me any harm? No.

Is it right? Who's to say. Like it has been said before people have a different opinion of what is deemed acceptable. For me smaking a childs leg so their skin turns red does not constitute child abuse.

For me the question is does smaking work? In my opinion all it ever did to me was further anger me and make me hate my parents for a brief period of time. I would then sulk for a bit before doing something else naughty to piss them off for smaking me in the first place.

What used to work more for me was seeing the genuine dissappointment in their eyes when I had done something wrong. The feeling that I had let them down in some small way. Being told why what I had done was wrong and then being given time in my room to reflect on what I had done wrong was far more effetive. I would then emerge from my room genuinely sorry for what I had done.

Smaking is an instant fix and quite simply often makes the parent feel better rather than a constructive way or teaching their child right or wrong.

What we need in this country is education in our schools on ways of enforcing disapline and right and wrong. If you've had good parents then it is easy to be a good parent. If all you know is violence then that is what you will use.

In short, I don't think smaking is a good way of teaching right and wrong, but done correctly it does the child no harm and it certainly shouldn't be banned. What we need is education not a nanny state banning crossing the road on your own!

 

[METALMICKY]

Liberal clap trap! The occasional clip round the back of the legs did me no harm as a child. It had the desired effect and i don't buy the violence begets violence as i'm 39 years of age and have neved had a fight in my life.

What needs to be addressed is those minority of parents who regularly use excessive violence. Parents need to be able to make up their own minds as to what suits them and their child. They don't need to be dicatated to by the Govt.

 

[magoo]

It doesn't take intelligence to be a parent unfortunately, Magoo.

You do the best you can and hope for the best.

Too true.

This is a bit like the drugs problem. Instead of punishing the users, punish the suppliers.

Don't make it illegal to smack children. Teach the children (Government responsibility) that violence does not enable you to get your own way.

The reason adults (& children towards friends/teachers) often resort to violence is because they are taught as soon as they can walk that to get your own way you have to hit.

 

[Sam]

it never harmed me being smacked, and believe me, it was often as i was a little shit!! from an early age, the child should be taught how to act in public (and in private), and complete control of the child should be kept until an age where the parent can give some responsibility to the child, when he or she decides to. Most parents these days are pushovers and have kids saying "I want this one etc..." if the parent gives in and gives the child what they WANT rather than NEED or can AFFORD, it will happen time and time again. Sometimes its hard to see who is in control, the kid or the parent.

Parents should be allowed force, if the House of Lords choose to ban it, it will be absolutely ridiculous, kids will go off the rails, they will wind their parents up so much then say "you cant hit me or ill take you to court".

Its another step to becoming the 51st State of America.