Smacking. Could you/would you/do you?

Person_one

Plushchris wrote: »

Totally agree with this, I think that kids now think they can get away with anything (looting/rioting for example)

ASBO = Anti Slap Brigade Offspring in my book

I'm 35 and my son is only ten months old, but I'll hold the same stance as above as its pretty much what I had, 2 warnings then a slapped bum. I never had a 3rd warning ever (never wanted to) and can count on one hand the number of slaps I got..

What rubbish.

You think most of the teenagers rioting last year were strangers to violence? Its the first language they learn to speak for a lot of deprived children!

My mind boggles at the thought of a father looking at his angelic 10 month old entirely innocent son and already planning to physically hurt him within a couple of years.

I was never hit (yes never, all you people who think its impossible to raise a child without resorting to violence at least once or twice) and I don't see at all how hitting your child to correct them is any better than hitting your wife or your elderly parent to correct them.

If its not acceptable to hit an adult because they did something you disapprove of then its not acceptable to do it to a child.

All 'smacking' (which is a really irritating euphemism anyway, if you think its ok to hit children then at least own that and call it hitting) teaches is that whoever is the most physically powerful gets to make and enforce the rules.

Should be illegal.

Person_one

All these people talk about 'calm, controlled, soft smacks that don't leave a bruise' are even more chilling to me than the people who admit that they've lashed out in a second of frustration.

That's more understandable to me than coldly weighing up exactly where and how hard to hit the child in order to deliver the right level of punishment (oops sorry, 'lesson').

If you are calm and clear thinking enough to do that, you should be calm and clear thinking enough to find a better way to deal with the situation.

Person_one

elvis86 wrote: »

As yet, all I can see from those who would see parents criminalised for occasionally smacking their kids, is the same tired old argument that violence towards an adult constitutes assault, and therefore violence towards a child should be the same.

Secondly, as I said before, an adult is not responsible for raising and disciplining another adult. A parent does have this responsibility towards their child.

If hitting a child is ok but hitting an adult is not, where is the line drawn? Can you hit a child in secondary school, at 16, all the way up to their 18th birthday? Does it depend on their Gillick competency? At what point is the child allowed to stick up for itself?

Is it ok for older children to hit younger children? After all, they frequently have a very central role in their upbringing and in helping them learn social skills.

As for your second paragraph, a boss or a tutor or a mentor is often responsible for 'raising' an adult as it were, for helping them develop and grow personally and professionally, why don't we let them hit if its such a useful teaching tool?

Tropez

Plushchris wrote: »

Totally agree with this, I think that kids now think they can get away with anything (looting/rioting for example)

ASBO = Anti Slap Brigade Offspring in my book

I'm 35 and my son is only ten months old, but I'll hold the same stance as above as its pretty much what I had, 2 warnings then a slapped bum. I never had a 3rd warning ever (never wanted to) and can count on one hand the number of slaps I got..

I think to suggest the blame for anti-social behaviour is due to a lack of smacking is missing the mark somewhat.

There are around 13 EU member states where striking a child is outlawed and considered as assault or worse. In 2009, the United Kingdom ranked as the most violent country in the EU and our violent crime rates were higher than that of the United States although our murder rate was lower. The UK ranked 2nd overall for total crime in the EU.

It therefore doesn't seem to correlate that not-smacking a child leads to increased anti-social behaviour and crime. Perhaps the idea that one can "get away with anything" stems from the way the media is persistent in reporting minimum sentences, as opposed to actual sentences, and likes to remind us that our prisons are filled with gymnasiums, satellite television and Playstations, making the threat of prison far less intimidating to potential offenders, particularly given the proportion of crime committed by those who fall into lower socio-economic brackets and would struggle to afford such luxuries in the outside world.

Gottodothis

I have a 20 year old daughter. I have never smacked her, never slapped.

My parents smacked me, hit me with sticks etc. I decided from a very early age that i didnt want kids cos i didnt want to have to hit them. I thought it was what you did.

Then when i found out that you didnt have to hit them i vowed i never would and i never did.

I now have my neices and a nephew living with me and a 16 month old child....i still dont smack

Caroline73_2

I'm amazed at the people who smack their children because they were about to run into the road or had just done so.

I used this radical technique of child control called 'holding their hand'. I believe similar methods such as 'toddler reigns' are alternatives.

I don't hit either of my children or my husband. That form of communication isn't welcomed in my home.

Person_one

Caroline73 wrote: »

I'm amazed at the people who smack their children because they were about to run into the road or had just done so.

I used this radical technique of child control called 'holding their hand'. I believe similar methods such as 'toddler reigns' are alternatives.

I don't hit either of my children or my husband. That form of communication isn't welcomed in my home.

I can see grabbing the child (my mum had to pull me back out of the path of a lorry once when I was about 12, too old for hand holding but just not paying attention), I don't really understand what good hitting does though.

If a child is running into the road or about to put their hand in a fire then hitting isn't the best way to stop the action. They must be grabbing the child/the hand, pulling them out of harm's way and then smacking them, as punishment. So still totally unnecessary.

tea_lover

bobble_hat wrote: »

That is awful for you, but I don't agree that there is a massive difference between the two, both evoke a sense of fear, mistrust and confusion and the lesser of the two can lead to the greater.

I was smacked (occasionally) as a child and it never evoked a sense of fear, mistrust and confusion in me.

I always knew perfectly well why it had happened - my mum had told me off, had warned me of the consequences, and I'd ignored that and carried on being naughty. It was never a loss of control situation, and never ever left a mark.

Oh, and FWIW I love my mum to pieces and have total respect for her.

If people don't choose to use smacking then fair enough, but to compare a slight tap with domestic abuse seems completely OTT and for me negates any other arguments the anti-smacking side may have.

elvis86

victory wrote: »

I was, a lot as a child....so no I don't as an adult to my children, ever, there has been a clip here and there but you could count those on one hand, just a tap really nothing more.

You can't take the supposed moral highground of "never ever" smacking your kids, then allow yourself "a clip here and there"!? Are you that desperate for the approval of your peers?

"A clip her and there, that you could count on one hand", is about the extent of what most people are advocating as a viable option that should be available to parents. I've not seen anyone proudly admitting to administering routine beatings with weapons.:cool:

Person_one wrote: »

If hitting a child is ok but hitting an adult is not, where is the line drawn? Can you hit a child in secondary school, at 16, all the way up to their 18th birthday? Does it depend on their Gillick competency? At what point is the child allowed to stick up for itself?

I would hope that by the time you're dealing with teenagers, you're beyond the need for a smack? I can't imagine many scenarios where a teenager's behaviour would warrant a smack from a parent?

I certainly don't think that affording teenagers the knowledge that they can use the threat of criminal proceedings against their parents for reasonably disciplining them is a good thing.

Maybe an interesting hypothetical question, but perhaps rendered pretty redundant if people apply a bit of common sense?

Person_one wrote: »

Is it ok for older children to hit younger children? After all, they frequently have a very central role in their upbringing and in helping them learn social skills.?

I have only advocated smacking within the unique parent/child relationship.

As an aside though, would you call the police if your 13 year old hit their 11 year old sibling during an argument? If the definition of "assault" is to be applied indiscriminately, then surely you would?

Person_one wrote: »

As for your second paragraph, a boss or a tutor or a mentor is often responsible for 'raising' an adult as it were, for helping them develop and grow personally and professionally, why don't we let them hit if its such a useful teaching tool?

Nobody "raises" adults. Redundnat argument.

Parents raise children. And I have only advocated smacking within the unique parent/child relationship.

Teachers and childminders are paid to teach/supervise children. They are not the children's parents, therefore they shouldn't smack them. Simple. At least come up with a new argument.

Plushchris

Person_one wrote: »

My mind boggles at the thought of a father looking at his angelic 10 month old entirely innocent son and already planning to physically hurt him within a couple of years.

Oh yeah, like I've made a note in my diary to do it.. get a grip!

Person_one wrote: »

All 'smacking' (which is a really irritating euphemism anyway, if you think its ok to hit children then at least own that and call it hitting) teaches is that whoever is the most physically powerful gets to make and enforce the rules..

I can honestly say does not teach that, I'm genuinely intrigued as to how would you know seeing as it never happened to you?

Are you saying that everyone that has posted on here saying they got smacked as a child has grown up to think that? Really??

Does not being smacked as a child turn you into a judgemental, holier-than-thou internet forum poster?