UK will be in contravention of international law if it does not ban smacking children

will this apply to those 'bangladeshi'  gangs!!??

It will make no difference, only a c*nt hits a child, they'll just ignore it, like child murderers and child rapists do.

That is nonsense. Millions of parents who are certainly not c*nts have smacked their children, and millions more who are not c*nts will do so in future.

Bollocks.

If you can't reason with, or control, a child without resorting to hitting it, you shouldn't be a parent.

How hard do you hit your children?

What if they don't do what you want after you've smacked them, do you hit them harder to show them who's boss?

As they get older and bigger, do you have to hit them harder still to get your way?

When they get to 16, will you have to punch fack out of them to get your point across?

Because a smack won't work against a 6 feet tall youth.

S&GC is spot on imo.

Having said that, I do think that parents who do smack their children do so with good intention. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The first country to outlaw the smacking of children was Sweden - in 1978.

Perhaps one reason why we have knife crime amongst our young is a lack of discipline.

Or poorly administered discipline. I would think that absent fathers are a major part of the problem. Women on their own can do a very good job but it's not easy.

I'd like to see an end to smacking -- if you don't hit them at all then you won't hit them too hard -- but you'd think the UN might have other priorities.

Stow_judge   
02 Jul 15 09:38 
Perhaps one reason why we have knife crime amongst our young is a lack of discipline.

That's not for me to dispute SJ, but if people can't control their children without hitting them, they're not doing it right.

If you smack a child you are not disciplining them you are hitting them. Just like if you smack your partner because they don't do what you want them to do you're not disciplining them either.

Children learn from their environment, which tend to be their parents. They are little sponges and will watch what their parents do and learn from them. I have 2 young children both say thank you regularly not because i have ever asked them to do it but because they have seen their parents do it and learned from observation. Likewise I used to bargain with them a bit, if you do this then we can do this, and currently the eldest one is constantly doing this with the youngest one.

If you smack a child then what you are saying to the child and what the child is learning is that if someone is doing something you don't want them to do then the preferred course of action would be to use physical violence and that's the best way to get them to stop. Are we saying now that the knife crime is down to the fact that not enough children are being exposed to physical violence.

If you smack your child then well done, you are teaching them to be a c*nt.

Bollocks.

If you can't reason with, or control, a child without resorting to hitting it, you shouldn't be a parent.

Well actually that's bollocks - the whole point is that children naturally don't have the ability to reason and act accordingly; they need boundaries to be set and sometimes a short sharp shock is completely appropriate. You need to differentiate between smacking a child to establish the boundary between what is and what isn't acceptable.

* You need to differentiate between smacking a child to establish the boundary between what is and what isn't acceptable and just hitting them out of anger and frustration

ffs

Still bollocks.

If the child continues to misbehave, what level of smacking do you aim for. 

A little pain, or it won't work?

A bit more pain, to teach them you're the boss?

Pick them up by the throat and pin them against the wall, but not actually hit them?   

Batter them harder as they get older, bigger and stronger, and tell the Social Services they fell down the stairs?

Hitting a child can never be justified. Not under any circumstances.

To me, the non smacking thing is designed for parents that are complete idiots, and shouldn't have been allowed to have kids in the first place. Unfortunately, any brain dead parent can have them!

Any decent parent knows what's right for their children, and in their eyes a slap could discipline them. Bring back the bloody cane I say!

Sheppey, answer the questions then.

If the child continues to misbehave, what level of smacking do you aim for. 

A little pain, or it won't work?

A bit more pain, to teach them you're the boss?

Pick them up by the throat and pin them against the wall, but not actually hit them?   

Batter them harder as they get older, bigger and stronger, and tell the Social Services they fell down the stairs?

Let's not forget that it's already illegal to smack a child to the extent that a mark is left.

It's illegal to murder people, but it still goes on.

I'm waIting for Roger The Butler, MisterBadger or sheppey to answer my questions.

Where do they draw the line?

It won't be long before we get halfwits who have no children on here telling us how it should be done.

You can talk whatever crap you want about a smack on the bum today will be battering the sh1t out of your kid in future if they don't do what you want, but by the same token then you could say where does bargaining with them go? If be good and we'll go to the park later doesn't work, will you end up offering to buy them a Ferrari for behaving? Yes, nonsense isn't it.

What I do know is that when I see a parent in the supermarket saying to their child "don't do that" and it carries on, and then don't do that again and it carries on, and several minutes later they are still saying it and the kid is still carrying on, and then you see another parent say don't do that, gets ignored and gives the child a smack on the bum to get their attention and make them realise they are serious, bringing them back into line, I'm with the latter parent's approach all day long, and definitely don't consider them making sure their children behave makes them c*nts.

I didn't ask for an essay. 

If the child [b]continues to misbehave, what level of smacking do you aim for.[/b]

Do this one first.

I didn't say I cared what you wanted.

So you can't answer the question.

Well, the answer I obvious. If they fail to  behave properly and respectfully...you smack them.
If they still continue with their naughtiness...you cane them.
If they still continue...you give them a damned good thrashing.
If they still continue...give 'em to Social Services with a note 'This child is a dud!'
Produce another one that, hopefully, functions properly. If not repeat as above.
You will eventually get a good 'un. Parenthood can be very rewarding, apparently.

One should never, ever punch a child in the head...it can bruise your knuckles. Always use a cane or riding crop.

If the child continues to misbehave, what level of smacking do you aim for. 

A little pain, or it won't work?

A bit more pain, to teach them you're the boss?

Pick them up by the throat and pin them against the wall, but not actually hit them?   

Batter them harder as they get older, bigger and stronger, and tell the Social Services they fell down the stairs?

FFS

If the child continues to misbehave, what level of smacking do you aim for. 

A little pain, or it won't work?

A bit more pain, to teach them you're the boss?

Pick them up by the throat and pin them against the wall, but not actually hit them?   

Batter them harder as they get older, bigger and stronger, and tell the Social Services they fell down the stairs?


It's clearly not about inflicting pain, so the question is irrelevant.

If you smack your child then well done, you are teaching them to be a c*nt.

I, my brother and sister and all our friends occasionally received a smack for misbehaving as kids but none of us has turned out to be a c*nt.

I have! 

I think boundaries can be set in this way as described by others on here. I think it's for parents to decide within their own families and they should not be telling others how to look after their children. Nobody wants to see children mistreated, but when a child oversteps a mark and a lesson needs to be learned, I think it's acceptable to smack a child.

Sheppey, answer the questions then.

If the child continues to misbehave, what level of smacking do you aim for. 

A little pain, or it won't work?

A bit more pain, to teach them you're the boss?

Pick them up by the throat and pin them against the wall, but not actually hit them?   

Batter them harder as they get older, bigger and stronger, and tell the Social Services they fell down the stairs?

..................................................................................................................

I think Roger summed it up quite well with the Ferrari anology. Why don't we stop doing everything in life cos it might lead on to worse things.

I think most parents are in control and want the absolute best for their children. I don't believe that a quick slap across the bum etc. is gonna lead on to them getting tied to a post and whipped like a masochistic slave!

Unfortunately, when some absolute monster appears in the media for beating the crap out of their child, it just makes everybody more against it.

For the first few years at secondary school hardly anybody stepped out of line cos if you did you got the cane. Everybody was feared to death of it (especially me!). When they abolished it, you could pretty much do what you wanted cos nobody could touch you. So I started wagging it which led onto getting expelled.

'Everybody should be forcibly transplanted to another continent from their family at the age of three"

Philip Larkin: Letters to Monika...I agree.

"I, my brother and sister and all our friends occasionally received a smack for misbehaving as kids but none of us has turned out to be a c*nt."

So you were subject to violence when you misbehaved and you now believe that violence is appropriate when someone misbehaves and you can't get them to do what you want to. By the way I didn't say you would become one, only you were being taught how to be one.

"For the first few years at secondary school hardly anybody stepped out of line cos if you did you got the cane. Everybody was feared to death of it (especially me!). When they abolished it, you could pretty much do what you wanted cos nobody could touch you. So I started wagging it which led onto getting expelled."

So the cane actually taught you f*ck all. All this using violence as discipline and you've just said that violence taught you no discipline. The cane was supposed to teach you to not step out of line, and look you stepped out of line a lot and got expelled.

Hitting or smacking children teaches them about fear and conforming out of fear, and this i think is a horrible way to bring up a child.

^^^ nope, the cane was not supposed to teach you anything...it was there as a deterrent that was all.

Children understand the cane, they agree it is right and is likely to make people kinder as adults as much as anything.

U.A. I think you misunderstood me.

I was wagging it cos I knew I couldn't be hit with the cane. A simple telling off made it seem worth missing some really boring lessons.

I needed discipline which wasn't there.

Plenty of support for hitting children on here.

A few have reproduced my whole post but not ansered ione individual question

Let us assume your child is 2 years old, and you smack it on the bum. The first time you do it, it probably comes as a shock to the child. We'll assume for arguments sake that it didn't hurt, as a nappy would have absorbed most of the force.

Now try to answer just one question.

If your [b]TWO YEAR OLD child continues to misbehave after the first 'smack', what level of smacking do you aim for next?[/b]

Softer?

The same?

Harder?

Simple a 2 year old doesn't misbehave it just behaves in a way that an adult doesn't want it to. It's 2. The most honest answer that parents who do this would give is "until it cries"

Sheppy from what you are saying you didn't need discipline you needed a deterrent.

If hitting children is being used as a "deterrent" then why not use it for the adults. What about using it for people with mental illnesses.

Oh and who determines what misbehaving is. You call your child for dinner and they ignore you, fine then do the same if your wife ignores you. What if your child is making a noise in a supermarket aisle, is that misbehaving. Maybe in your eyes but if there is no law saying that is the case then what makes you right. What if they ask you something and you ignore them or don't respond quick enough. Would you let them beat you and take your punishment like "a man".

Why are you hitting them if you've said it's not teaching them anything. To stop them doing something you don't want them to do. What if they want to stop you doing something doing something they don't want you to do?

It isn`t working, you see children left and right telling their parents to shut-up, talking back non stop, lying and cursing, demanding things from them....while you`re busy counting 1..2..3.

I often see people scream & shout at their kids in a hysterical way which makes me favour non hitting, cos these people seem to take their frustrations out on their kids.

I can just imagine them being every teachers worst nightmare, phoning up the school complaining all the time and constantly upsetting their neighbours.

BUT, there's a lot of really decent people about that are very much in control of the situation, and if they believe a quick slap is right, then I'm all for it.

U.A. Yes, I see where you're coming from now. I did need a deterrent and the cane was a good one. I'm mentally weak and if you give me an inch I'll take a mile.

So you were subject to violence when you misbehaved and you now believe that violence is appropriate when someone misbehaves and you can't get them to do what you want to.

Well personally I don't regard a smack as "violence" any more than a car park bump is a major road traffic accident. I do think a smack is much more effective tha trying to reason with a child that isn't capable of understanding rational argument.

By the way I didn't say you would become one, only you were being taught how to be one.

You're being pedantic, I think the implicit meaning was there!

If your TWO YEAR OLD child continues to misbehave after the first 'smack', what level of smacking do you aim for next?

Two years old is too young for a smack, it would have no more effect than trying to reason with it... at that age you just have to put up with it... and to reiterate my earlier post, the point of a smack is not to inflict pain or suffering - but it is an effective reminder of where a boundary has been crossed

Plenty of support for hitting children on here.

A few have reproduced my whole post, but not answered one individual question

Let us assume your child is 2 years old, and you smack it on the bum. The first time you do it, it probably comes as a shock to the child. We'll assume for arguments sake that it didn't hurt, as a nappy would have absorbed most of the force.

Now try to answer just one question.

If your WO YEAR OLD child continues to misbehave after the first 'smack', what level of smacking do you aim for next?[/b]

Softer?

The same?

Harder?


Only MisterBadger has answered. What about you other children smackers?

Two years old is too young for a smack, it would have no more effect than trying to reason with it... at that age you just have to put up with it... and to reiterate my earlier post, the point of a smack is not to inflict pain or suffering - but it is an effective reminder of where a boundary has been crossed

Let's move on then.

If your FIVE YEAR OLD child continues to misbehave after the first 'smack', what level of smacking do you aim for next?

Softer?

The same?

Harder?

ok, just to humour you - the same

It doesn't work then.

It's all about tactics isn't it??? Learning how to keep the child under control. If smacking does the job then so be it. I can't imagine a parent putting a lot of thought into increasing the pain of the smacks. I think it's just one of those spur of the moment things where you do what you feel is necessary at the time.


If your WO YEAR OLD child continues to misbehave after the first 'smack', what level of smacking do you aim for next?[/b]


Haha, it's not like a gambling strategy where you keep increasing the size of your stake!

It's all about tactics isn't it??? Learning how to keep the child under control. If smacking does the job then so be it.

If I came and asked you to do something you didn't want to do at work, as your boss, would it be okay if I clumped you until you did it?

Haha, it's not like a gambling strategy where you keep increasing the size of your stake

Really?

Try smacking a 16 year old 6 footer on the arse.

I've always wondered not being a parent, how does it make you feel afterwards? Guilty, no different, all empowering?

I can't ever envisage a scenario where I would smack a child. I have failed in my duty if it's got to that point imo.

I always thought it was one of the perks of the job. Like 'Parents Privileges' sort of thing.