Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

Should smacking children be banned?

last reply
167 replies
6.5k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by Theladyisaminx
At one time, doctors use to briefly smack on the cheek to bring someone out of hysteria.
I think with children, it should be a last resort, but yes - it may be necessary on occassions, especially with boys.
Plim sad

Why especially with boys?
I wondered that to - if anything imo its easier to get boys to do as they are told or is my son just a mummies boy
Some boys only respond to corporal punishment - as a man I could never hit my daughters anyway, but I knew a father who did - wrong to me :!:
PlimSeems sexist to me but thats your own opinion which you are very much entitled to biggrin
I think all children should be treated the same! I have 2 boys 1 girl it is my daughter that is hardest to raise in some aspects.
Do you and Naughtynymphos think it's OK for fathers to smack daughters?
Plim :shock:
Quote by Plimboy
At one time, doctors use to briefly smack on the cheek to bring someone out of hysteria.
I think with children, it should be a last resort, but yes - it may be necessary on occassions, especially with boys.
Plim sad

Why especially with boys?
I wondered that to - if anything imo its easier to get boys to do as they are told or is my son just a mummies boy
Some boys only respond to corporal punishment - as a man I could never hit my daughters anyway, but I knew a father who did - wrong to me :!:
PlimSeems sexist to me but thats your own opinion which you are very much entitled to biggrin
I think all children should be treated the same! I have 2 boys 1 girl it is my daughter that is hardest to raise in some aspects.
Do you and Naughtynymphos think it's OK for fathers to smack daughters?
Plim :shock:
If that is their way of bringing up a child and do not abuse that child......then I think it is ok
Dave_Notts
Quote by Plimboy
Do you and Naughtynymphos think it's OK for fathers to smack daughters?
Plim :shock:

no but as i put in a post i dont think its ok to smack children at all, the point i was making is if you had a son and a daughter and you cought them doing the same thing how can you justify hitting the boy but not the girl? a childs a child and should be treat the same, if you did hit your son but not your daughter you sons going to go thro child hood thinkings hes not as loved as his sister, and if you'd punish the girl in another way so as you didnt have to hit her why not do that to the boy and not hit him as well?
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad
Quote by Lost
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

When you foster kids you sign a 'boarding out' undertaking. This piece of paper says you will bring up a 'looked after child' as you would your own. Social Services cant be seen to be condoning violence against children. Also, if these people say they smack their own child how would that possibly work? Their child gets smacked, foster child doesent,couldnt possibly work. I think Social Services were right not to allow them to foster in this particular case.
Quote by helnheaven
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

When you foster kids you sign a 'boarding out' undertaking. This piece of paper says you will bring up a 'looked after child' as you would your own. Social Services cant be seen to be condoning violence against children. Also, if these people say they smack their own child how would that possibly work? Their child gets smacked, foster child doesent,couldnt possibly work. I think Social Services were right not to allow them to foster in this particular case.
I don't believe they said they actually did or had smacked their child. Just that wouldn't state they would not. I suppose thats a bit nit picking but hey. Social services are probably right and will undoubtedly know far more on this than the information the media will ever be able to impart or want to impart to us. I guess I just feel sorry for the kids. Ostensibly to me it seems they lose out again according to the 2 minute slot in the local news i saw. : :(
Quote by Lost
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

When you foster kids you sign a 'boarding out' undertaking. This piece of paper says you will bring up a 'looked after child' as you would your own. Social Services cant be seen to be condoning violence against children. Also, if these people say they smack their own child how would that possibly work? Their child gets smacked, foster child doesent,couldnt possibly work. I think Social Services were right not to allow them to foster in this particular case.
I don't believe they said they actually did or had smacked their child. Just that wouldn't state they would not. I suppose thats a bit nit picking but hey. Social services are probably right and will undoubtedly know far more on this than the information the media will ever be able to impart or want to impart to us. I guess I just feel sorry for the kids. Ostensibly to me it seems they lose out again according to the 2 minute slot in the local news i saw. : :(
I watched an interview with this couple. The wife stated they had, on rare occasions, smacked their daughter.
What is a smack to some people, is a beating to others can you imagine what could happen had the Social Services allowed them to foster? It could possibly open up flood gates for alsorts of people to be approved as foster parents then the great "whats the social services playing at?" debate would be at the forefront of the media......again.
Quote by helnheaven
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

When you foster kids you sign a 'boarding out' undertaking. This piece of paper says you will bring up a 'looked after child' as you would your own. Social Services cant be seen to be condoning violence against children. Also, if these people say they smack their own child how would that possibly work? Their child gets smacked, foster child doesent,couldnt possibly work. I think Social Services were right not to allow them to foster in this particular case.
I don't believe they said they actually did or had smacked their child. Just that wouldn't state they would not. I suppose thats a bit nit picking but hey. Social services are probably right and will undoubtedly know far more on this than the information the media will ever be able to impart or want to impart to us. I guess I just feel sorry for the kids. Ostensibly to me it seems they lose out again according to the 2 minute slot in the local news i saw. : :(
I watched an interview with this couple. The wife stated they had, on rare occasions, smacked their daughter.
What is a smack to some people, is a beating to others can you imagine what could happen had the Social Services allowed them to foster? It could possibly open up flood gates for alsorts of people to be approved as foster parents then the great "whats the social services playing at?" debate would be at the forefront of the media......again.
Fair play ~hnh~I agree 100% damned if they do damned if they don't so they go for the least 100% damning damning confused . it is a brave new world and I guess though I do believe in smacking being allowed in the parents tool kit. I also understand that the world has to move on and i guess we can all hope that oneday there will be no need for smacking what so ever. I do however also feel that parenting is a matter for the state to be aware of and guide not do. I guess the nanny state is becoming mum & daddy state.
Quote by Lost
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

When you foster kids you sign a 'boarding out' undertaking. This piece of paper says you will bring up a 'looked after child' as you would your own. Social Services cant be seen to be condoning violence against children. Also, if these people say they smack their own child how would that possibly work? Their child gets smacked, foster child doesent,couldnt possibly work. I think Social Services were right not to allow them to foster in this particular case.
I don't believe they said they actually did or had smacked their child. Just that wouldn't state they would not. I suppose thats a bit nit picking but hey. Social services are probably right and will undoubtedly know far more on this than the information the media will ever be able to impart or want to impart to us. I guess I just feel sorry for the kids. Ostensibly to me it seems they lose out again according to the 2 minute slot in the local news i saw. : :(
I watched an interview with this couple. The wife stated they had, on rare occasions, smacked their daughter.
What is a smack to some people, is a beating to others can you imagine what could happen had the Social Services allowed them to foster? It could possibly open up flood gates for alsorts of people to be approved as foster parents then the great "whats the social services playing at?" debate would be at the forefront of the media......again.
Fair play ~hnh~I agree 100% damned if they do damned if they don't so they go for the least 100% damning damning confused . it is a brave new world and I guess though I do believe in smacking being allowed in the parents tool kit. I also understand that the world has to move on and i guess we can all hope that oneday there will be no need for smacking what so ever. I do however also feel that parenting is a matter for the state to be aware of and guide not do. I guess the nanny state is becoming mum & daddy state.
I speak as an approved foster parent who has, on occasions smacked my own child as it was growing up and I might add, whilst fostering.
You are right, damned if you do, damned if you dont. Thing is, in this day and age so many people who shouldnt be near kids slip through the net and its refreshing to see at least one local authority is on the ball.
Quote by Lost
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

Why couldnt they have just seen how that couples own Children had turn out? dunno
Wouldn't that have given them some idea how good a parents they would make? :dunno:
Quote by Theladyisaminx
Why couldnt they have just seen how that couples own Children had turn out? dunno
Wouldn't that have given them some idea how good a parents they would make? :dunno:

Not really. Unfortunately, there are just too many people trying to get into Fostering these days for motives other than wanting to care for children less fortunate than their own. Very sad but very true.
Quote by Theladyisaminx
I saw on TV yesterday that a cpl have been told they can not foster children as they will not categorically state they won't smack their own child. They did say catagorically would not smack any child fostered by them. It is such a shame I guess thats just another few kids left in institutionalised care then sad

Why couldnt they have just seen how that couples own Children had turn out? dunno
Wouldn't that have given them some idea how good a parents they would make? :dunno:
Its alot more to do with possibles etc IMO if the foster parents were to look after a child who had been abused beaten etc seeing another child or even being smacked themselves (however the smack was meant wether for behaviour etc) could have huge consequences and open up a whole different can of worms. Social services are only covering all areas / eventualities? and have the best interest of the child in mind
I think Social Services are spot on with this.
god this is a hard one, this is a question that even has me arguing/debating with myself.
on one hand i understand when people say smacking shouldnt be banned,probaly because we have all done it.
however when i search within myself i know it was wrong. i hear people say " i was smacked and it never did me no harm" but did it do you any good? or did you turn out ok because of love respect values and moral that were installe din you, not the smack or leathering you got??
when i look at the smackig debate now, as a older wiser and calmer person, i honesty can say i dont think any child should be physically struck, nor should they be mentally, or sexually abused or face neglect or no love.
would i ever strike any child that wasnt my own?? no way, would i be appalled if i saw my daughter smack her daughter yes.
so i cant accept smacking.
in the case of the recent story about the foster family i actually sat there and though how stupid are they to bring this to the attention of the media.
they did say they have or would smacked their own children, however would not smack a foster child???
hello why??? if you can find the means or restraint to deal with someone elses child without smacking then why not your own??
and why should the foster child have to witness their children being smacked or threatened with it?
its not an ideal world, but i think social services did the right thing here.
xx fem xx
Quote by helnheaven
Not really. Unfortunately, there are just too many people trying to get into Fostering these days for motives other than wanting to care for children less fortunate than their own. Very sad but very true.

I agree with you on this. I remember a few years ago a couple of people we knew telling us about how they were considering fostering. The discussion moved on and Mrs Lost asked why not adopt rather than foster. The reply threw us both
"You don't get paid for adopting"

I wonder how it'd possible to take away the 'financial' incentive. People will always find ways of using and abusing the system it is the way of things. Perfectly good people getting brushed aside through the guarding against things such as what we're discussing.
Quote by Lost

Not really. Unfortunately, there are just too many people trying to get into Fostering these days for motives other than wanting to care for children less fortunate than their own. Very sad but very true.

I agree with you on this. I remember a few years ago a couple of people we knew telling us about how they were considering fostering. The discussion moved on and Mrs Lost asked why not adopt rather than foster. The reply threw us both
"You don't get paid for adopting"

I wonder how it'd possible to take away the 'financial' incentive. People will always find ways of using and abusing the system it is the way of things. Perfectly good people getting brushed aside through the guarding against things such as what we're discussing.

Theres evan a financial in incentive to kids to be in foster care ffs! mad
I thought I would relaunch this thread as it can go hand in hand with another I have running at the moment.
I see there are some new forum users around that might like to add their say to what I thought was a good topic to debate.
Quote by Theladyisaminx
I thought I would relaunch this thread as it can go hand in hand with another I have running at the moment.
I see there are some new forum users around that might like to add their say to what I thought was a good topic to debate.

Well as you did, here's my take (from a so called 'liberal')
"Should smacking children be banned?"
No, it should be encouraged (in the appropriate circumstances).
Quote by Theladyisaminx
I thought I would relaunch this thread as it can go hand in hand with another I have running at the moment.
I see there are some new forum users around that might like to add their say to what I thought was a good topic to debate.

Probably not a good idea at the moment minxy. lol
I have never smacked my children, but should my parenting skills fail me.....I reserve the right too....... rolleyes
No, reasonable chastisement or the threat of is and always should be a part of a parents armoury.
My definition of reasonable, one smack on the bottom or legs.
However the penalties for crossing the line into unreasonable should be severe.
Quote by staffcple
No, reasonable chastisement or the threat of is and always should be a part of a parents armoury.
My definition of reasonable, one smack on the bottom or legs.
However the penalties for crossing the line into unreasonable should be severe.

And there I am afraid lies the $ question. What does one call unreasonable?
To some a smack would be that, to some ANY form of punishment would be unreasonable.
It's like if a burglar broke into your house you can " use reasonable force ". What the heck does that mean? dunno
I think you can " smack " a child as long as it does not leave a mark? :shock: Then that would constitute a tap surely? How can you smack a child which is for something it has done wrong, but smack it so softly that it has the opposite effect? A smack should be a deterent to the child, and that deterent is a little pain from the smack, without a touch of pain how does the smack work exactly?
If we all knew the answers to those things, we would not be having this conversation.
there is an answer. No smacking at all, ever.
biggrin
Quote by splendid_
there is an answer. No smacking at all, ever.
biggrin

Of course it's an answer.
I and a lot of others believe it's the wrong answer.
Quote by Peanut
there is an answer. No smacking at all, ever.
biggrin

Of course it's an answer.
I and a lot of others believe it's the wrong answer.
and a lot of people agree with me. Especially those that have seen me 'parenting' and those who have met my son. From my pedestal of perfect parenting I can look down with a patronising glint in my eye and sleep a sanctamonious sleep.
Quote by splendid_
there is an answer. No smacking at all, ever.
biggrin

Ok lets say your answer was right, let me give you a situation which I know has happened to someone.
The child is 9 and has been grounded for stealing. The police have brought him home and the parents have issued the " your grounded " arguement.
After two days the child is becoming more aggressive to his Mother. On the third day he says he is going out, and she says" no your not ". He then pushes past her knocking her to the ground, before then shouting at her to " fuck off ".
In that situation what is the answer? The naughty chair for this boy? More grounding? The child had never been smacked only had the naughty chair and grounding as a punishment. Obviously that is now not working and the Mother is now left in fear as to whay he will do if she allows him to get away with what he has done to her.
What happens the next time? Will he hit her? Spit at her with more venom? Does she have to live her life in fear of her ferel child?
Would be interested to hear an answer to that one. In my opinion had she have given his arse one good whacking I bet he would def think twice the next time he wanted to push her to the ground. A mother in fear of a 9 year old ffs. Obviously the naughty chair has worked in her house. :shock:
Mind you some would say a good coucillor would work for him. Maybe anger management classes perhaps. :shock:
Quote by kentswingers777
there is an answer. No smacking at all, ever.
biggrin

Ok lets say your answer was right, let me give you a situation which I know has happened to someone.
The child is 9 and has been grounded for stealing. The police have brought him home and the parents have issued the " your grounded " arguement.
After two days the child is becoming more aggressive to his Mother. On the third day he says he is going out, and she says" no your not ". He then pushes past her knocking her to the ground, before then shouting at her to " fuck off ".
In that situation what is the answer? The naughty chair for this boy? More grounding? The child had never been smacked only had the naughty chair and grounding as a punishment. Obviously that is now not working and the Mother is now left in fear as to whay he will do if she allows him to get away with what he has done to her.
What happens the next time? Will he hit her? Spit at her with more venom? Does she have to live her life in fear of her ferel child?
Would be interested to hear an answer to that one. In my opinion had she have given his arse one good whacking I bet he would def think twice the next time he wanted to push her to the ground. A mother in fear of a 9 year old ffs. Obviously the naughty chair has worked in her house. :shock:
Mind you some would say a good coucillor would work for him. Maybe anger management classes perhaps. :shock:
Ahhhh the coucilling(sp) route....
The way all local authorities go when they haven't got a fukin clue what they are doing or what to do next.....
Perhaps telling the child he wont get any sweeties this week if he continues being naughty might have done the trick...
I'm not being so pendantic with you personally Kenty or with anyone else for that matter just so as you know :thumbup:
What annoys me about the idea of legislation with a topic such as this is that it assumes that every parent in the Country hasn't got a clue how to raise their children with love, consistency, care and respect.
Most people understand the a young child is a delicate thing that needs nurturing and guidance and not abuse. Smacking a child if done careful and not in anger is a clear and concise way to give a warning that they are doing something wrong. Children that are young are not always able to reason between right and wrong as they don't have the experience, but they can understand that if the do A then B may happen and therefore avoid doing it again. Eventually they will fully understand why.
Adults that bully or abuse children will do so with or without laws being placed as they are not doing it for the good of the child, but for their own good. These people are already covered by law and it would perhaps be better to make the punishment longer for those that are found to have abused children, rather than start policing every parent who is trying to raise their child in a loving and controlled/gentle way.
My son is nearly 15 and I can only remember smacking him twice, one time was for running across a busy main road without checking first. I nearly died running across the road trying to save him. He didn't know it was wrong as he didn't get ran over, I smacked him so he new not to do it again. He never did do it again (thank God). It wasn't that he was left on his own as a child as he was holding my hand as we came out of a shop and pulled away on impulse. We didn't even need to cross the road, so it was quite a shock.
The other time was when we were at the shops and he stole a chocolate that was at low level. I didn't notice until after we left the shop, so I smacked his bottom, frog marched him back to the shop and made him apologies. As far as I know he has never done that again. On both occasions no mark was left and the tears were more to do with having upset me than being hurt. He would be far more upset if I sent him to his room than received a smack.
I do realise some people will be frowning at my response, but I'm proud of my son and our relationship and I will not believe that makes me a bad parent.
Quote by splendid_
there is an answer. No smacking at all, ever.
biggrin

Of course it's an answer.
I and a lot of others believe it's the wrong answer.
and a lot of people agree with me. Especially those that have seen me 'parenting' and those who have met my son. From my pedestal of perfect parenting I can look down with a patronising glint in my eye and sleep a sanctamonious sleep.
I have no doubt that your parenting skills are excellent, I also have no doubt that your son is a star (no sarcasm meant) and you ahve been kucky to end up with a lad like him.
You've been lucky, a lot aren't. I wonder where you'd go if your son hadn't responded to non-physical chastisement and/or persuasion?
I don't suppose though that you've noticed the corollary between the popularity and rise in "no smacking" and the escalation of youth crime?
I'd also like to point out that my agreement with smacking is not meant as a 'smack the little gits at every opportunity'. It's meant as just another weapon in the armoury of a parent. One to be brought out at an appropriate time, not one to be strapped to your waist for use at a moment's notice.
Quote by venus68
I do realise some people will be frowning at my response, but I'm proud of my son and our relationship and I will not believe that makes me a bad parent.

This guy isn't frowning, it's exactly what I would have done.
There is a time and a place for telling a kid to take a time out, likewise there is a time and a place for an instant, painful lesson. I wonder which one the kid remembers for longer? I'm betting it's not the time out.