Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Should UK also Ban Smacking?


Sanjeev Nanda
 Share

Recommended Posts

Smacking and other violent forms of discipline are likely to be harmful to the long-term development of children, a study into the effects of physical punishment has claimed.


 


Campaigners said the findings, based on a comprehensive analysis of two decades of research, showed it was time for the Government to yield to international pressure and finally ban smacking in Britain.


 


As well as making children more aggressive towards parents and siblings – and later in life towards their peers and spouses – the Canadian study found that physical sanctions can lead to increased levels of antisocial behaviour. Smacking can also cause depression, anxiety and drugs and alcohol abuse, the study claimed.


 


The findings come after the former Labour Education minister David Lammy reignited the debate over the issue when he claimed that many working-class parents were confused over the laws governing smacking. Mr Lammy admitted he had smacked his children and suggested that curbs on traditional discipline might have contributed towards the social breakdown witnessed during last summer's riots.


 


London Mayor Boris Johnson also called for clarification of the law to reassert parents' rights, claiming he was backed by the Education Secretary Michael Gove.


 


But in an article published in today's Canadian Medical Association Journal, two leading childcare experts have argued that 20 years of evidence shows such an approach is counter productive. "Virtually without exception, these studies found that physical punishment was associated with higher levels of aggression against parents, siblings, peers and spouses," said Dr Joan Durrant, of the University of Manitoba, and Ron Ensom, of the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario. "Results consistently suggest that physical punishment has a direct causal effect on externalising behaviour, whether through a reflexive response to pain, modelling or coercive family processes."


 


The authors said a trial involving more than 500 families trained to use non-physical punishments found that problem behaviour declined.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/smacking-children-causes-long-term-damage-6612088.html


Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2016/04/28/spanking-harms-kids-doesnt-work-and-leads-to-long-term-problems/#24b72ef815a9

 

There’s pretty much no benefit to spanking children to discipline them, and mountains of evidence show that spanking risks harming children, both short-term and long-term. Kids become more aggressive and anti-social, have more mental health problems from childhood into adulthood and misbehave more—and are more likely to end up abused. That’s the conclusion of the most recent meta-analysis on spanking, published in the Journal of Family Psychology and involving more than 160,000 children—though it’s unlikely to settle the debate that has continued for years over whether spanking is acceptable or whether it hurts children.

 

A meta-analysis is sort of the mother of all scientific studies: researchers bring together many past studies that studied the same research questions, use specific criteria to narrow down the most similar and/or highest-quality ones, and then analyze all the numbers together to get a sense of what the general consensus in the overall evidence base is. Just four previous major meta-analyses have been conducted on the short-term and long-term outcomes of children who were spanked. This new meta-analysis, authored by Elizabeth Gershoff, PhD, at the University of Texas at Austin, and Andrew Grogan-Kaylor, PhD, of the University of Michigan, set out to address two criticisms of the past research—that spanking has too often been combined or conflated with more abusive punishment or behaviors, and that only poor quality research has found negative effects from spanking.

 

Despite hundreds and hundreds of studies, the general public, and sometimes even some social scientists, can’t seem to agree on how harmful or beneficial spanking is. Part of the problem is that the research on spanking is messy. It’s hard to separate out all the different factors that might influence how a child turns out, and spanking has a chicken-or-egg problem: Do more difficult children simply get spanked more by their parents, or does getting spanked cause kids to act out and misbehave more? (The handful of long-term studies looking at this question point to the latter.) But the research isn’t so messy that clear patterns haven’t emerged from it: the vast majority of social scientists agree that spanking can lead to problems in childhood and adulthood and doesn’t have any real upsides. Only a handful of social scientists disagree, and their studies tend to be less specific and lower-quality.

 

 

 

Emily Willingham and I sifted through many of these hundreds of studies in researching the science on child discipline for our book, The Informed Parent: A Science-Based Resource for Your Child’s First Four Years. We developed a strong understanding of what the research showed and therefore felt confident in relying heavily on the findings from Gershoff’s previous meta-analysis in 2002. That paper included 88 studies that assessed 11 different possible outcomes among children who had been spanked (excluding abusive behavior) and found only one positive result of spanking: that children immediately complied with a parent’s instructions. Over time, however, research has shown that immediate compliance declines and eventually disappears despite spanking.

 

All 10 of the other findings showed that spanking was linked to negative outcomes to varying degrees. Children who were spanked had a poorer relationship with their parent and had lower levels of moral internalization, which means they were less able to determine that something was morally wrong for its own sake rather than knowing it was wrong because they’d get smacked otherwise. Spanking was also linked to poorer mental health, higher levels of aggression and antisocial behavior—both in childhood and later on in adulthood. Children were also more likely to become victims of physical abuse and had a higher risk of physically abusing their own child or their husband or wife if they had been spanked.

 

Considering how many studies were included and how many factors were studied, it would seem that the previous paper covered all the bases in showing that spanking is definitely related to harm of children. Yet naysayers who support spanking continue to criticize the past research for one reason or another, and spanking remains common and supported in the U.S. in general. An ABC News poll of over 1,000 adults two years ago found that 65% of Americans approve of spanking, and half said they sometimes spank their child (though research suggests that’s an underestimate). Another national study in 2014 found that 76% of men and 65% of women agree that children sometimes need “a good hard spanking.”

 

So this new study by Gershoff and Grogan-Kaylor set out to answer two of the biggest criticisms of past research. The authors’ first research question was whether the harm to children seen in past spanking research was driven primarily by including harsh or abusive discipline methods in the overall definition of spanking. In other words, were the problems that spanked kids had actually linked only to spanking, or were those kids also abused by their parents aside from spanking? The second question looked at whether past studies were of high enough quality and statistically strong enough to show that the negative outcomes really were linked to spanking.

 

From an initial review of more than 1,500 studies across 50 years, the authors narrowed down the studies they included to 75 research papers. Just over half of these had never been included in the past four meta-analyses, making this study the most comprehensive and up-to-date one available. The authors relied on four criteria to narrow down the studies they examined: a) the study was peer-reviewed, B) it assessed spanking by itself, separate from harsher methods, c) it accounted for other factors that might affect children’s outcomes and d) the study included enough statistical data for the authors to analyze it. Most studies included in this meta-analysis used the term “physical punishment,” defined as “non injurious, open-handed hitting with the intention of modifying child behavior”—or, more simply, spanking.

 

Out of 17 negative outcomes, the researchers found that spanking was linked to 13 of them. The strongest associations with spanking were a negative parent-child relationship, child mental health problems and an increased risk of a child becoming an abuse victim, followed by low moral internalization, more aggressive child behavior, antisocial behavior in childhood and adulthood, more behavior problems in childhood and mental health problems in adulthood. To a lesser extent, spanking was also linked to lower self-esteem in kids and diminished thinking abilities.

 

The authors’ statistical analysis also very clearly showed that these outcomes were specifically linked to spanking—not to other kinds of harsher punishment or abusive behavior—and that the studies showing it were strong. All these outcomes are the same ones seen, to a greater severity, with kids who actually are abused. Basically, spanking and child abuse occurred along a continuum that showed the same kinds of short-term and long-term problems, but the problems are worse and bigger in children who are abused.

 

The biggest weakness of this study, as with nearly all studies on spanking: It’s not possible or ethical to randomly separate families into two groups where one group spanks and one doesn’t and then see how the kids turn out. But the associations and statistics in this study and others is solid enough to strongly suggest spanking does, in fact, cause these problems. The authors conclude, “Parents who use spanking, practitioners who recommend it and policymakers who allow it might reconsider doing so given that there is no evidence that spanking does any good for children, and all evidence points to the risk of it doing harm.”

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was smacked on rare occasions. I remember putting a football through the window at the back of the house after being repeatedly asked not to kick the ball near the window,  I got smacked on legs quite hard and quite honestly I deserved it for being so shit at football. Kids today are lucky that windows are double glazed ,   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is what I can't get my head around (and I'm willing to accept that not having children means I have a different perspective) but why is a smack the only thing that works in that situation? What does a smack do other than reinforce the idea that you solve problems with violence?

I don’t get it either.

 

The other thing I’m struggling with is the frequent use of the term ‘punishment’ in people’s posts. I’ve never seen my role as a parent to ‘punish’, rather to teach, reinforced by example. I’ve never hit my kids as as an adult I’ve never hit anyone, in the same way I’ve rarely shouted at them and certainly never sworn at them because I’ve wanted them to grow up as civilised human beings and with the expectation that that is what they should expect in all their other relationships.

 

Punishment and discipline have never been an issue for us at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was smacked as a kid and I do think it gave me certain boundaries. However I would still misbehave and I think the only thing I had in mind was "If I get caught then this is a smacking offence". I don't think it stopped me doing anything naughty and I think it spilled over into the lesser offences too. I don't smack my kids, even though the 6 year old has been a right twat on numerous occasions.

 

When I was 7 I was leaving school with my pencil case that had my marble collection in it. I was throwing it in the air and catching it because I was THAT cool. Horror of horrors, it got stuck in a tree. So, being 7, I climbed up the tree and got it back. Easy. Except - on the way down, about 8ft up, a branch broke and I fell out. I put my hands out to break my fall and broke both bones in both my forearms! Not that we knew that at the time of course... but anyway my mum came rushing over, lifted me up by the wrist and smacked me on the arse! Never quite understood that one!

 

Louis CK's bit on it is great:

 

“And stop hitting me, you’re huge. How could you hit me?! That’s crazy. You’re a giant, and I can’t defend myself.”I really think it’s crazy that we hit our kids. It really is–here’s the crazy part about it. Kids are the only people in the world that you’re allowed to hit. Do you realize that? They’re the most vulnerable, and they’re the most destroyed by being hit. But it’s totally okay to hit them. And they’re the only ones! If you hit a dog they… will put you in jail for that… You can’t hit a person unless you can prove that they were trying to kill you. But a little tiny person with a head this big who trusts you implicitly, f(orget) ’em. Who (cares)? Just… hit–let’s all hit them! People want you to hit your kid. If your kid’s making noise in public, “Hit him, hit him! Hit him!Grrr, hit him!” We’re proud of it! “I hit my kids. You’re… right I hit my kids.” Why did you hit them? “‘Cause they were doing a thing I didn’t like at the moment. And so I hit them, and guess what? They didn’t do it after that.” Well, that wouldn’t be taking the… easy way out would it? “

I’ve never heard of him but I think I like Louis CK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No wonder the world is fucked. I was smacked as a child and it scared the crap out of me and gave me anxiety and a fear and hatred of my Dad, not respect. Lots of people only have kids so they can be authoritarian bullies. Hopefully one day the world can grow the fuck up.

Is that what drove you into mummy’s arms?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got to be honest here, I meet such a variety of children in my job (as I guess would teachers and social services staff) that what works for one child won't necessarily work for another. Had my own son ever reacted in a way that caused me to think he was being emotionally damaged I'd never consider doing so again. But on every occasion it's had the desired effect in regulating that future behaviour and we've sat and talked about what he did wrong and why he was smacked.

 

The research is interesting but my own opinion is that it's down to individual parents unless it's excessive, commonplace or gratuitous. You won't find a little kid closer to his Dad than mine is to me and it's a much closer bond than with his mum whose never considered smacking. I'd imagine if I was the kind of parent that couldn't be arsed with his kids, was largely absent other than a trip up the stairs with a belt and an angry face to deal with their noise it'd be damaging and he'd remember it. As it happens the only time I really remember being upset as a kid to the extent that it's vividly stayed with me is being accused of stealing £5 from my Mum's purse. After about two hours of accusations, denials and groundings she remembered she had paid the milkman with the missing fiver. I can still feel the sense of frustration and upset now so I guess if that's what some of you are carrying I can see why you feel that way regarding smacking. 

 

I'd be interested in a correlation between parents who accept smacking as a valid tool and the advice that parent would give to the child about dealing with being hit by another child at school for example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I find interesting in this discussion is the use of language. People who believe spanking is wrong will quickly use words like "violence" and "assault" and I think that's a little unhelpful, perhaps even underhanded, as those words mean something different to me.

 

Well, that's the point, isn't it - they "mean something different" to you, but the distinction you're making is completely arbitrary. If you smacked another adult, or even someone else's child, then it's indisputably (at the bare minimum) assault, a crime of violence.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's the point, isn't it - they "mean something different" to you, but the distinction you're making is completely arbitrary. If you smacked another adult, or even someone else's child, then it's indisputably (at the bare minimum) assault, a crime of violence.

It’s an interesting question for those who think smacking is ok. Would you be ok with teachers or relatives smacking your kids? Would you smack someone else’s kid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s an interesting question for those who think smacking is ok. Would you be ok with teachers or relatives smacking your kids? Would you smack someone else’s kid?

Jesus when I think of the hidings I got at school for. Ireland in the 70's and 80's were a grim time to be a school kid.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's the point, isn't it - they "mean something different" to you, but the distinction you're making is completely arbitrary. If you smacked another adult, or even someone else's child, then it's indisputably (at the bare minimum) assault, a crime of violence.

 

 

As far as I'm aware, the conversation is not about smacking other adults or even someone else's child. 

 

I stand by my point that the use of language is mischievous in this discussion. "Violent assault" does not adequately describe spanking your own child, with appropriate force, on the bottom or back of leg, as a loving, measured, and thought out consequence to remedy errant behavior. 

 

Describing that action as violent assault is as unhelpful and inaccurate as an underworld boss beating someone to within an inch of his life and telling the police, "I gave him a little slap to teach him a lesson." 

 

Switching gears slightly, I am interested in what you feel about this issue from a liberal perspective. As a comparison, I was reading the other day on here about how you were championing individual freedom, for example in the area of gambling, saying that personal responsibility trumps governmental interference in trying to legislate against various bad outcomes, such as addiction and trapping the poor. 

 

So how could that line of thinking be applied to this issue? 

 

Do you feel government should try to legislate morality, rather than allowing parents the freedom to do what they think best in a given situation when it comes to raising their children? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s an interesting question for those who think smacking is ok. Would you be ok with teachers or relatives smacking your kids? Would you smack someone else’s kid?

 

 

I'm a bit uncomfortable arguing the case for smacking, as it has never really been a part of our child rearing (if it happened it was once or twice, and with all the sort of restraint I've described on here, which is very different to the caricature of an out of control parent angrily beating their child on a regular basis, and having no real thought or plan with regard to other avenues of discipline). 

 

Still, since I'm not against spanking your own child in the sort of way I've described in this thread, I'll offer an answer to the question you pose.

 

I would be against teachers and other relatives smacking my children. 

 

Did they use the right amount of force?

Was the smacking justified?

Could they have done something else? (reason, telling off, warning, some other consequence...)

 

It's difficult enough to judge the various factors as the parent, so there's no way I'd feel comfortable allowing someone else to smack my child. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I can't get my head around (and I'm willing to accept that not having children means I have a different perspective) but why is a smack the only thing that works in that situation? What does a smack do other than reinforce the idea that you solve problems with violence?

How else do you show a 4 year old not to mess about with fire? Of course there is a good argument for a stupid parent leaving a lighter,even smoking with young kids about but sometimes 'shock and awe' is the best option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How else do you show a 4 year old not to mess about with fire? Of course there is a good argument for a stupid parent leaving a lighter,even smoking with young kids about but sometimes 'shock and awe' is the best option.

Talk to them?

 

How does a 4 year old child understand a smack as a deterrent unless learnt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd be interested in a correlation between parents who accept smacking as a valid tool and the advice that parent would give to the child about dealing with being hit by another child at school for example. 

 

What do you say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

A legal ban on smacking children in Scotland is set to be formally passed by the Scottish Parliament today.

Opponents and supporters of the controversial new law are expected to stage demos outside Holyrood ahead of the final vote on the issue.

The Green politician behind the bill, John Finnie, has called on MSPs to show “courageous leadership” by becoming the first part of the UK to introduce such a ban.

 

But the Be Reasonable campaign, which has opposed the move, issued a last-ditch appeal for the measure to be blocked, amid concerns that many “loving parents” will be turned into criminals.

The Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill would remove the defence of “reasonable chastisement” in Scots law, which allows parents to use physical punishment on children. Mr Finnie said: “The Scottish Parliament has the opportunity to show courageous leadership by putting in place vital legal protections for Scotland’s children. 

 

“It is staggering that our smallest and most vulnerable citizens are the only people who do not currently have this protection, and now is the time to rectify that. Physical punishment has no place in 21st century Scotland. 

“The international evidence tells us that it can have serious adverse impacts on children, and that it is not effective. It is time for parliament to put an end to it tonight.”

 

But a raft of experts, family groups and campaigners have issued a statement calling on the legal status quo to be preserved. Among the signatories are Prof Tommy MacKay, a consultant child psychologist and former president of the British Psychological Society, Joy Knight, former national chair, Children’s Panel Advisory Committee, as well as Dr Simon Knight, a senior community work practitioner, and Prof Ellie Lee, director, Centre for Parenting Culture Studies.

It states: “The discourse around smacking is dishonest. It conflates ‘hitting’ and violence with smacking… A careful examination of the evidence does not find that light, infrequent physical discipline is harmful to children.

 

“Removing the defence will leave loving parents open to police cautions and even criminal convictions for behaviour which is, by definition, ‘reasonable’. The stress this would bring to parents and children far outweighs any perceived benefits.”

 

It adds: “The vast majority of Scots do not want to see smacking criminalised, regardless of their views on smacking as a parenting technique.”

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...