Smacking

[sophster]

How come it is illegal for an adult to hit another adult, and in the home this is called domestic abuse if a man hits his wife (or vice-versa) but when a parent hits a child it is perfeactly alright and is called smacking?

[mimififi]

to hit a child in the way that the question suggests, i.e akin to a violent man beating his wife, is already illegan in the UK.  I think the new ruling is that parents are allowed the right to choose how to discipline their children (as part of their human right as parents), including corporal punishment, however, they must not leave a bruise on the child as part of the spank.  I do not believe it goes as far as to rule out red marks which fade within a few minutes, after all, a child could go to sleep in bed on the seam of the pillow and wake up with a red mark on their skin as a result, this does not leave a permanant mark and does not hurt the child in the same way a bruise does.

I would never dream of hitting a child in the same way an adult might hit an adult, full of anger and hatred.  i would not dream to hit a child in the way a man might hit his wife, systematically, for everything and nothing and out of hatred and control, but I do spank my childrenonly for disobedience.  I don't mind my children being children and exploring their surroundings, but if I say "stop biting your brother" or "do not answer me back like that" and they continue to do so, then I will spank them, because I want them to be accountable as adults and to understand that poor social/personal behaviour has consequences. 

beating children and causing emotional/physical or psycological damge is already illegal.  making more rules to make it even more illegal is not going to stop those people who are like that from doing it.  The only thing that is going to combat child abuse is a more efficient social service with better training in child protection for teachers and carers and a more community based society with higher family values.  A society that helps the isolated and disadvantaged  family and helps instead of judging might help stem some of the poor parenting that occurs.  It won't, sadly, help all cases.

[Red_Pixie]

I was smacked as a kid, and sometimes I resented it and sometimes I didn't. The times I did were when my parents hadn't controlled their anger and hit me because they were angry and frustrated and wanted to take it out on me. The times I didn't were when they'd considered it and used it purely as a discipline measure, without emotion being involved.

Actually, when I went to Universiity, we all sat round and swapped stories about how our parents disciplined us - my Mum broke a few wooden spoons on me, others had belts, rolled up magazines, etc... We were all laughing about what little terrors we were. No psychological damage there!

[gingerflaps]

I too was smacked as a child, and like Red_Pixie I have also had a few wooden spoons snapped as a result from my Mum hitting me across the bottom with them. I dont think there is any harm in smacking a naughty child. There is 2 yrs diffrence between me and my bro and as children we were always fighting and arguing, and if we didnt stop my mum would bang our heads together or in exteme cases she would hit us with a wooden spoon or her flip-flop. We grew up to be normal responsable adults. On the other hand my sister is 10 yrs younger then me and has never been smacked, she is 14 and she is a loud-mouth obnoxios little brat who's always answering my mum back, I personally think she could of done with a few smacks to sort her out.

[mimififi]

Gingerflaps:  That is toooo funny!!!  I was smacked with a variety of objects, sometimes anything my mum could get a hand too.  If the wooden spoon was in the stew, it was normally a hairbrush, or sometimes also a flipflip (although this seemed to be seasonal!).  My brother is 10 years younger than me, and although we have a brother inbetween, he is still living at home aged 22, still has my mum do everything for him and has no sense of self, or any other variety of discipline.  As a child he had all of us four running around after him and a mum who was coming to the end of her parenting and getting to the age where children are spoiled.  he was smacked very seldom, and now is frankly not only a perpetual student, but frankly a bit of a lazy toerag!!!!  I think he could have done with the spoon too.  Hehehehe.

Also, I now have a good relationship with my parents and I am proud of who i am and GRATEFUL to my parents for making me the adult I am today.  I could have gone the other way as I was a wayward child. 

[Cathy]

I am from the UK, but I would also like to hear about the difference between smacking, spanking, and hitting. It sounds to me like people desperately trying to justify themselves.

[Oneeyedvic]

Cathy, as said previously - most people over the age of 30 were smacked as children - we do not have generation of people aged 30+ who are emotionally scarred for life. A smack given with an explanation is not the same as child abuse.

Htting a child as someone would hit an adult in a fight is child abuse - and is not and will never be tolerated by rational people..

 

Not really that difficult is it?

[LordyGeordie]

I was smacked as kid and it never done me any harm

Anyone who agrees with me and wants to write can contact me at HMP Broadmoor...

[ipswich2286]

If you look at the youth of today (myself not included), you can see what a good thing a quick smack is. How many kids (8-17) are lairy little ****s because they have no fear of reprisal. I live on one of the south's most "chav" infested council estates, and I am glad I was smacked as a kid. At least I understand respect and am able to get a job.

[kaktus]

So what some of you are saying is, that you basically can't get respect from children unless you smack them?

[Coobeastie]

Cathy

I haven't got children yet so don't feel the need to have to justify anything. 

Kaktus....i think what ipswich is trying to says is that these unruly kids have no understanding of limits. The normal retort you get is you cant touch me.

I'm 28 and have grown up during a lot of the changes to how we treat children, I remember as a teenager commenting on the fact that the country was going to go to pot and lo and behold it has.  

[blinkyblinky]

My parents were smacked as children. When they brought me and my brothers and sister up, they did it in the way they thought was normal, the way their parents had bought them up, and their parents' parents', and their parents' parents' parents. We kids just accepted it as normal. No one put it into our heads that our parents were somehow abusing us or infringing our rights, so we accepted it as part of the rough and tumble of life.

I was given a clout at home and the strap at school in Scotland. It was always a big shock when it happened, and it always made me think about what I had just done to deserve it, and made me determined not to let it happen again. I did something bad, and something bad happened to me - it was a very obvious and easy lesson to learn.

When I have traveled in Africa and Asia, I see kids who are respectful towards adults. They seldom cry. If they cry, it's usually because they are sick or have seriously hurt themselves. In the UK, so many kids are disrespectful, they make their parents lives miserable, they make adults' lives miserable. Now my parents are old and they are frightened to go out because of the aggro they receive from youths in gangs in the streets. In those other countries, adults being frightened of kids? - it's unimaginable. Young children in this country cry not because they are hurt or because they are sick, but because they don't get what they want. They don't just cry, they shriek, they run around supermarkets and libraries screaming. I've seen this happening so often, and only ever in this country.

I'm not saying smacking is a wonderful thing, the answer to all society's woes. But I do think that those kids would soon start behaving themselves if, every time they misbehaved, they got a clout.

And finally (Oh no! Not again!) - it never did me any harm.

[blinkyblinky]

anyone interested in this topic might like to read this:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1593 326,00.html

[kaktus]

"People treated particularly badly under the age of three were more likely to go on and abuse as adults. Early intervention is required to stop a cycle of violence from developing.'" Treated badly is in my opnion neglet and probably violent upbringing.

OK My dear British friends. Tell me what is the acceptable smacking. We have some heads banged together, belts, broken wooden spoons and smacks across legs, buttoms (and perhaps heads?). VIc says it's ok as long as it doesn't leave a mark. I'm quite sure that belts and broken spoons leaves a mark so is that acceptable or not? Do all, that agree to smacking, think the above examples of hitting is ok?

I'm sorry to go on and on, but I am actually interested and not trying to be sarcastic or anything like it. You must all remember that some of the above examples most definitely is child abuse,  in my opinion, no what matter what the involved says :)

To end and start with your link Blinky, and going off topic - sorry sophster. I recently read an excellent book called Freakonomics by an American economist and an American journalist. They claimed (and the methodology seemed ok to me) that the reason there was a big decline in murders all over the US in the 90s, e.g going from over 2000 murders a year in New York to about 600, were due to legalising abortion. Young mothers suddenly had a choice and thus perhaps breaking a bad cycle by NOT having the children that would grow in a questionable environment. That fits well with what your link claims blinky, that is the bad enviroment and parents not being able to give their child a decent upbringing.  

[blinkyblinky]

To answer your question directly, kaktus, I'd say that leaving a mark means leaving a bruise or a scar.

Wikipedia also gives a very clear account of the arguments for and against:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanking#Arguments_for_span king

Both sides have strong arguments, and I'm not really decided myself. For example:

"Opponents claim that spanking teaches children that violence is an appropriate way to treat one who offends."

seems a pretty strong argument.

"Some [parents] use spanking only when a child does something dangerous and it is critical that an immediate, lasting impression must be made."

also seems very reasonable.

One thing about the Observer article which I thought was ridiculous - the guy carried out extensive research, reported the findings and was then "denounced by many as demonising young parents." What was he supposed to do? Sweep the results under the rug to avoid offending people?

[sophster]

Hey you're forgiven Kaktus! Lol, I'm actually surprised how much feedback I got and much controversy there was. It sounds like the whole of the last generation were smacked as children :o(

Though there has been more support for hitting children I stand by my guns on this one; oh well if we all agreed on everything it would be a very boring world. Though some people were very extreme in my opinion.

Oh yeah and one more thing, I would like everyone to know that not all children of today are yobs who hang around on street corners and mug old ladies. There are actually a lot of nice ones out there. I think that as a community we are a lot more aware and this has rubbed of on our children. They know what sex is, what drugs are and they think it's all cool. I think that kids a bit younger than me have a v. bad press. They're not all druggies etc.

[kaktus]

Indeed Blinky. I would never say anything against a parent who was terrified because who smacked the child in panic when her/his child had almost been run over by a truck or almost stuck his/her head in a pot of boiling water. I still think it's wrong to spank in my above examples but they're understanble if you know what I mean. A very interesting link btw, it's baffling what one can find on Wikipedia! I'm all with you about what should he do, the researcher qouted in the Observer. You get result and they should always be discussed no matter what they say. First thing to discuss really is the method and if that is sound then they should discuss the results instead of discussing the researcher!

Thanks sophster it's always nice to be forgiven! :0)

I would guess that the reason why it has caused controversy is that this debate confront the way people were raised or raise their children on both "sides". You should award yourself some stars for starting it, it is very interesting!

 

ps. I've never seen or heard of  a child tried to stick his or her's head in a pot of boiling water, wierd things my brain can come up with :0)

[Kat535]

Jury's out on smacking - but aren't some alternative forms of discipline as cruel in an emotional way?  I don't smack my child, I don't agree with it for all the reaosns given so far and also because I know that depriving her of my attention for a period of time will work equally well - but I sometimes feel that a smack would be quicker and fairer.  What do others think?

[sophster]

Wow. You guy are at each other's throats now!

No worries Kaktus. Lol. ;0)

I just wanted to make the point that on the news if there's been a bombing they always say ' 12 children have been wounded' as if they are more important than the adults that have been killed. Then they treat children as second class citizens (in my opinion) by making it illegal to 'smack' another adult but just 'disciplining' to hit a child.

I know a good many adults who deserve to be smacked! Adults do many bad things, some much worse than what a child will do but no one smacks their behind, cos that's illegal. I think that it's not fair to blame kids for everything that goes wrong, when in fact we should be blaming bad parenting and that does not need to involve smacking as far as I'm concerned.

[blinkyblinky]

sophster - good point about kids not all being bad. Unfortunately the good kids never get on the evening news or the front pages of newspapers, and it's the bad ones who do that give the rest a bad name (and make people like my parents (and myself admittedly) apprehensive when passing a group of youths in the street.)

Another point which just came to me. Getting hurt is a natural part of life. If a kid grew up without ever feeling physical pain, as an adult, he or she would think nothing of putting his/her hand into a pan of boiling water or eating broken glass. Getting hurt teaches us about life and how to survive it. If a kid falls from a tree and hurts his/her leg, you wouldn't say the tree has abused the child, or that stinging nettles infringe a child's human rights. Physical pain is a very good teacher, there aren't many other things that get a child's attention in quite the same way. Haven't really thought this through, but maybe this supports the pro-smacking side of the argument. I'm still undecided myself, so all you anti-smackers, don't be too hard on me.

[Cathy]

Reading all the postings since my last one, it warms the cockles of my heart that so many people seem to think it's acceptable to hit hit children with various objects if they cry when not in pain or ill.
Oneeyedvic - I am over thirty, was smacked, do not consider myself abused, yet feel that it damaged my relationship with my mother and has had a detrimental effect on me.
I'd also like to add that I get fed up of all teenagers being portrayed as holigans and muggers. The majority of them are fine. I've never had any problems, but they have opened doors for me and can be a lot frendlier and more courteous than people older than them. Finally, it seems that a lot of the arguments for smacking children are similar to the ones used 100 years ago for husbands hitting their wives