Some say, 'Spare the rod and spoil the child'. Others say that since it's an offence to hit an adult, why should it be considered OK to hit a child. And then you have Agony Aunt, Anne Atkins saying that there's a difference between hitting and smacking. Seems to me that the word 'smack' is a euphemism for 'hit'.
My personal experience is that I didn't make a habit of smacking my kids, who are all grown up now. On the few occasions I did, I either gave them a choice of a smack on the bottom or to be sent to their room. I never smacked in anger but with the benefit of hindsight I think it's wrong to smack, angry or not.
However, the main issues here are- Should the government have a say in such family matters?
- Would a law banning smacking be enforceable?
- Would it give an opportunity for children to blackmail loving parents?
What do you think?
2 comments:
I agree that smacking is often carried out in anger, yet as they discipline their children, Christian parents have been known to justify their actions by quoting Bible verses. I was often badly beaten for even the smallest of offences which regularly resulted in bruising and marks that took days to go away. This approach to parenting is anything but 'Christian' and only served to lessen my respect for my parents and their so-called faith. I don't think smacking works, there are other ways to discipline children and, in the heat of the moment, many parents will go further than they should which can result in abuse.
There are indeed other disciplinary measures, but sometimes a smack is the only option as a last resort. Full spankings? Something very different. I suppose I'll find out one day when I become a parent, but I think it would be daft to ban it for the sake of parents who abuse it - and I look forward to the challenge of never overdoing it, and genuinely using it only as a last resort.
Post a Comment