Should it be legal to smack your child?

[Evil Inky]

Fact, some kids, especially teens won't be reasoned with, won't be told, won't be bribed, won't be blackmailed, don't give a damn about loss of certain privileges, and don't give a damn about being grounded. Its part of the process of growing up, its testing who is top dog in the family unit, we all go through life stepping in to dead (wo)men's shoes and/or giving the old top dog a good nudge off their perch and taking their place, that is how the world works. Any kid is at it, regardless how young, and when they spar with their elders on mentally equal or superior levels, and/or have an equal or superior pig-headed stubborness, what is left to achive order but physical force?

And if physical force doesn't work (it won't even be an option for parents who are smaller than their offspring), what then?

[Colin]

Imagine the outcry if it became legal to hit your wife, or your employee, as long as you didn't use an implement or leave a mark.

 

Off topic argument...

 

The big difference here is that you are talking about adults and, from what I can see, nobody is advocating taking an 'instrument' to beat their kids..

 

The issue seems to be whether, or not, the application of a quick slap should be used to install a little dicipline and respect for the parents authority without some busybody reporting your actions to the 'authorities'.

[Evil Inky]

The issue seems to be whether, or not, the application of a quick slap should be used to install a little dicipline and respect for the parents authority without some busybody reporting your actions to the 'authorities'.

I would argue that "a quick slap" doesn't install respect, it installs fear.

 

As least it would as far as I am concerned.

[derick]

Fact, some kids, especially teens won't be reasoned with, won't be told, won't be bribed, won't be blackmailed,

 

Sounds like the Teen Terminator. and they WILL NEVER STOP

 

but they do, and get past it (thank Non-existent God).

 

nobody that ever had bairns never raised their voice. anybody says different is a liar. A LIAR I SAY!!.

 

and I hereby place Shetland_Boys on the naughty step. As my owld man said "never hit a boy, becis a boy becomes a man'. No da most moral of statements - but brawly practical.

[swh_13]

I completely agree we Ghostrider an Colin and I'm spikkin fae experience.

I wis a complete nightmare o a bairn an wid probably hiv been diagnosed we ADHD nooadays. Da ony wy my mam could control me wis by geein me a haet muckle sphincter whin I wis bad an it finally sunk in and I thankfully became a sensible, well behaved person.

I tink its rediculous dat folk still seem tae tink we hiv better descipline methods nooadays whin aabody can see a massive decline in da standards o behaviour in young people in dis country (though I acknowledge dis is highly exaggerated by da media).

Also sayin dat smackin your bairn will lead dem tae bein violent is completely unfounded. I understand if you are abusive and actually physically hurt your bairns dey might turn resentful an violent, bit if you do it in a calm an rational wy, fae ivry such instant I kane, it has teached da bairn (or teenager) dat dey wir in da wrang an dir bad behaviour will hiv consequences.

[Sherlock]

Point of order, Chair.

 

As I always strive to make clear, I will not be drawn into the fine points of law, or discussions on such. However, I endeavour to point out or address misconceptions, where my chosen profession is concerned. As always, the following consists of my own views and experiences, and do not reflect the profession, nor the Force, in which I serve.

 

With this in mind, I would like to point out a misconception, which has arisen herein.

 

"If the Police using handcuffs, pepper spray, batons etc, all of which are considered "acceptable", isn't "physical chastisement" I really cannot imagine what is."

 

Handcuffs are used in the physical restraint of any person taken into Police custody. This is for the individual's protection, as well as that of the Officers detaining said individual. It is a requirement on any Officer carrying out such a detention, not a personal option or choice.

 

Police in the UK use CS spray - not gas, spray - which is a dilute form of CS. Not pepper spray, which is intensely painful and entirely debilitating, upon application. CS spray evaporates rapidly, having temporarily disabled any person requiring its use upon them (in most cases). Such use must be answered for and recorded, and will be subject to scrutiny. Any complaint arising from its use would be investigated accordingly. However, both CS and the baton (which also requires justification for, and recording of, the reason even for drawing the baton), along with the stab-proof vest, form the Officer's personal protective equipment.

 

The key word to point out here is "protective", not "chastisement". You do not draw your CS and spray an individual simply for annoying you, nor should you draw your baton and strike them for the same reason. In my experience, only in defence of yourself, or another, or to restrain someone from causing physical harm to themselves or others, or to prevent likely violent conflict or disorder, will these items be drawn and used. To do otherwise is to risk complaint and investigation, with the strong possibility of disciplinary and/or legal action.

 

Once again, these are my opinions, based on my experience. However, I would hope most, if not all, of my colleagues would agree.

 

Here endeth the lesson.

 

As ever, I remain,

 

Your humble servant.

[Guest posiedon]

I'm surprised nobody has said it yet but I don't think they have; so, "it never did me any harm"

 

Oh and Sherlock the bobby that lived (and had his office) at the end of our road in the early 60s, thought nothing of whacking you about the head with his heavy gauntlets, even for the tiniest transgression.

 

Still; as I said, it never did me any [lasting] harm.

[swh_13]

I'm surprised nobody has said it yet but I don't think they have; so, "it never did me any harm"

 

 

I said that in a kind of round about way, but that was my basic argument! I'd actually say it did me a lot of good!

[shetlandpeat]

noun

1.

severe criticism; a rebuke or strong reprimand.

2.

corporal punishment; a beating.

 

Which one, and how can pulling a child away from danger, or death be bad, US you have now a reputation for arguing for arguments sake.

 

Let us think, a worst case, death by fire or a ticking off along with a dislocated shoulder.

 

P, you are a bully, well on here so it did harm you.

 

As Sherlock points out, protection is the key here. Failure to protect a yungun can be against the law. Beating them and causing them pain afer the event is pointless and possibly a very dodgy act.

[DizzyKipper]

I remember when Scotland 'banned smacking', seeing in the paper a humorous cartoon depicting the Scottish-English border with a long queue of cars... It was captioned 'last smacking stop before Scotland'

 

I looked it up at the time, I think the law was, no hitting children below a certain age (2 years?), not hitting the head, not hitting with any object, and not hitting hard enough to leave a mark. Smacking is not outright banned.

 

Yes if someone complained the police could become involved, but you wouldn't be charged with anything unless one of the four rules above were broken, or there was some other aggravating factor.

 

Just found this:

 

From 27 October 2003, it will be illegal to punish children by:

 

Shaking

Hitting on the head

Using a belt, cane, slipper, wooden spoon or other implement

 

has smacking been banned altogether?

 

Smacking is not completely prohibited. Whether a physical punishment is legal or not will depend on the factors detailed previously under 'changes in the law'.

 

Source: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/10/18406/28339

[Sherlock]

Master Posiedon,

 

And I believe, once upon a time, old ladies were burned as witches and you could be hung for stealing a loaf of bread...

 

Your humble servant

 

Post Scriptum

It may interest you to know that more than a few bobbies of that era were (allegedly) wont to drop pennies into the fingers of their old, heavy gloves. This added a certain "je ne sais quoi" to a smack, or even a tap, around the head with said accessories, I believe, which those so struck were not keen to experience more than once! Or so "they" say.

 

Just think, sir! You may, in fact, have been "coshed"!

 

YHS

[Ghostrider]

noun

1.

severe criticism; a rebuke or strong reprimand.

2.

corporal punishment; a beating.

 

Which one, and how can pulling a child away from danger, or death be bad, US you have now a reputation for arguing for arguments sake.

 

Let us think, a worst case, death by fire or a ticking off along with a dislocated shoulder.

 

P, you are a bully, well on here so it did harm you.

 

As Sherlock points out, protection is the key here. Failure to protect a yungun can be against the law. Beating them and causing them pain afer the event is pointless and possibly a very dodgy act.

 

 

Would it be possible to have this converted in to something a bit nearer English please. Something in the ball park of Shetland would even do.

[unlinkedstudent]

noun

1.

severe criticism; a rebuke or strong reprimand.

2.

corporal punishment; a beating.

 

Which one, and how can pulling a child away from danger, or death be bad, US you have now a reputation for arguing for arguments sake.

 

SP, you couldn't be further from the truth. I studied Health & Social Care with the OU, the first course when embarking upon my journey as a mature student yonks ago. I referred to both sides; for and against in my OP above.

 

Argument's sake? Okay then, the truth. I WAS severely beaten up as a child from as far as my memory can recall until the age of 12 when I moved in with my father. Mum was addicted to valium and couldn't cope with three of us. On top of that, I was bullied at school. One of my sisters, on the other hand, never got hit but got out of hand as a teenager and after stealing from my mother, went into care. She decided throughout life it would be a good idea to blame everything on our parents, stating that our parents should have spent more money on us and not buy us second-hand bikes for Christmas, etc. She has been declared bankrupt (She totally lived beyond her means, spoilt her kids rotten - TV in each bedroom at the age of 3, etc.), refuses to work full time, STOLE off our grandparents even up until in her thirties; in essence, the biggest pain in the ass you could have as a sister.

 

So who speaks to both parents now out of the three of us (I have 2 sisters)? Answer: only me. Mum never recovered from having electric shock treatment and yonks of "medical abuse", now resembling a zombie with her fried brain.

 

The moral: I'm the only one in the family to have gone on to gain any qualifications outside school, the only one to have worked full time, and I don't go to my parents for handouts.

 

So on the one hand you have me, beaten to a pulp by my mum, works for a living, and on the other a thieving sister who thinks nothing of stealing off elderly relatives and it was she who was never smacked/hit AT ALL.

 

So SP, think again. I said smack, not beating a kid around the head until they bleed.

 

I tire of hearing babble about when things happen to you as a child you can't move forward and are scarred for life - okay, some peeps will be but not all. We are responsible for how we deal with our lot in life; life is what you make it.

 

Oh, and Poseidon - It didn't do me any harm but hey, I deffo had more than a smack. No doubt some others on here may disagree.

 

Edit: Oh dear, SP, I didn't answer your questions, did I? Well firstly, it took a while for it to dawn on me that US didn't stand for United States but that you were, in fact, referring to me. So I have a reputation now, do I, according to you? Phew, nowt to worry about there then!

[PS13]

This thread has never ceased to amaze me this day. At one point i'm reading about giving messages --- along the lines of raising voices, yes we have all done it, however, from experience as well as working with extremely vulnerable people now for over 15 years - there is no justification for smacking a child, if you are to succumb to that level - I certainly would like to think you are witnessed, and reported. Shouting at your child, will only lead to mental abuse, and this will live in your child throughout their childhood, and even going on to adult hood, ruining future relationships, as well as future parenting techniques. The impact is too huge to explain, and for many - who really cares? You all have your different views, but mine, a parent of a 16 and 17yr old, one who has caused many a sleepless night, as I couldn't smack, ground, withdraw privileges, as yes - he didn't care, or give a stuff. Banned from every school - and who questions why? Who gives him trouble? who finds out any given reason - NO ONE other than the parent - but you loose that trust, and in life you loose some valuable trust that a smack/shout couldn't have earned you.

 

Look around and look at the numbers of children who are damaged, through parents or their peers, shouting, arguing because they cant agree on how best to discipline, and what's the outcome - misery from what I have seen.

 

No, I'm no perfect parent, certainly wouldn't be nominated for 'mother of the year', but what I do have is my children's trust, respect, and genuine love - for one thing _ i certainly would not of brought my children up as I was brought up - similar to previous post from an honest woman who mentions her sisters - again, similar, I work out of my 3, gained an education, and hopefully showed my children some good morals and principles as well as values throughout their lives. I would not wish any of them to go on further through life thinking it's acceptable to smack, or shout at people..... They have not been perfect... but what child is? Hormones as well kick in for the poor children around their teenage years, bodies changing, relationships forming, schools changing.... ect...

 

I'm only glad I hold my own values and morals, which at last has given me the best years of my life and two very dear children whom I am proud to also call my friends ( in an acceptable parent/child relationship ), and heres to the rest of you when deciding what's in the child's best interest when your'e hitting your head around a brick wall on what direction to take!!

 

I do note - the initial thread is certainly veering off towards different angles.....

 

Wishing you all the best.

[Ghostrider]

^ Not arguing here, just pointing out certain flaws. You presume a kid will learn from parental behaviour, you are right, but its not so simplistic as you paint. Yes, as you say some will copy their parent(s) exactly and repeat any mistakes therein, while others, especially with maturity will identify the weaknessess in how their parent(s) operated with them, and develop their own alternative methods which address those weaknessess.

 

I think its reasonable to state that most folk would agree that respect is a major component of controlling another, be it parental or otherwise. Unfortunately some individuals, both adults and children of all ages, will only cede subordination to, and have respect for another, where the other has clearly demonstrated thier physical superiority, in exactly the same way as animals fight. It is then that physical chastisement becomes a legitimate and effective tool.