Anti-Smacking Law

[Hepcat]

Hmm... the NZ government wants to introduce a new anti-smacking law in some kind of rather feeble attempt to lessen domestic violence.

Now I am opposed to this because when I was little I knew that if I misbehaved I would get a smack, and I don't believe that is domestic violence since it wasn't a beating. I know that there are families in which children are beaten but will this law change that?

My theory is that it will only make parents frightened of their own children reporting them for domestic violence. What happens when a little kid has a row with their parents then goes up to a police man knowing he can get back at them by saying they were hit by their parents? And whats more is how are the police supposed to PROVE it!

So what are people's views here? Should it be legal to discipline children how the parents see fit or must everything be done with a kind word and a cookie nowadays?

[Fragony]

When I got smacked I deserved it, nothing wrong with a little tough love. Leave parenting to the parents.

[Adrian II]

When I got smacked I deserved it, nothing wrong with a little tough love.*smacks Fragony*

[Kralizec]

@Adrian II: don't worry, I don't think that this law covers smacking if it happens between consenting adults.

[Fragony]

*smacks Fragony*

pappa?

[Husar]

I agree, a little smacking here and there is only healthy for kids.
My parents smacked me and I respected them, they changed that with my little sister and it's sad to have to say that she is a spoiled brat and doesn't really respect my mom, only my dad and I have some authority over her which has to do with our physical strength mostly. With my mom she always engages in endless discussions until my mom gets tired and gives up and my sister knows that very well I think.
A bit of :whip: is sometimes needed to raise a nice person, parents need to know where to stop though, I'm not talking about beating kids up.

Reminds me of that movie (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ii4WoVF0H98) "... this is your oath *smack* and that's so you remember it.":2thumbsup:

[Lorenzo_H]

pappa?
Big Brova's watchin' you

back on topic, If I didn't get smacked when I needed it, I wouldn't be the person I am today. I'm against this kind of law, anywhere.

[HoreTore]

This is already illegal here in Norway.

And I'm quite happy with that, actually.

[TB666]

This is already illegal here in Norway.

And I'm quite happy with that, actually.
Same here in Sweden.
I have never gotten smacked and I turned out good.

[Sjakihata]

It is illegal to smack children in school, at home and of course to hit women (or the other way around) in denmark. I think that is progress - smacking isnt good for anyone. Not the parent and certainly not the child, that's abuse.

Move on, welcome to the 21st century.

[Vladimir]

Oh dear. What has happened to Scandinavians. :no:

[Kralizec]

I suggest sleep-deprivation and waterboarding as alternatives, then.

[Vladimir]

I suggest sleep-deprivation and waterboarding as alternatives, then.

I don't think that would work on children. They always want to stay up late and go swimming. Cranky, wet children are a form of torture used on adults.

[HoreTore]

Well, as your parents should have told you:

"Solve your problems with words, not violence". That applies to all aspects of society, violence should NEVER find place, anywhere. That includes "smacking" children.

[Duke John]

I believe this was also proposed in the Netherlands, but I can't recall wether it got through. However the law was supposed to enable the justice system to make a case against the serious offenders and not to prohibit parents from giving kids a "twist around the ears" (is that English?) when they are doing bad. And in that sense I think this law is good.

[Fragony]

"Solve your problems with words, not violence". That applies to all aspects of society, violence should NEVER find place, anywhere."

Awww common, nothing says 'I strongly disagree' like a well delivered punch in the face, some people just react better on that, saves time.

[Ja'chyra]

It is illegal to smack children in school, at home and of course to hit women (or the other way around) in denmark. I think that is progress - smacking isnt good for anyone. Not the parent and certainly not the child, that's abuse.

Move on, welcome to the 21st century.


Well, as your parents should have told you:

"Solve your problems with words, not violence". That applies to all aspects of society, violence should NEVER find place, anywhere. That includes "smacking" children.

Smacking children is not abuse, most of the time it doesn't even hurt it's just a way of showing an extreme displeasure and as most parents can tell you sometimes it's the only thing that will get through to a child.

I'm with the leave parenting to the parents crowd.

[BDC]

I think children seeing violence as the answer is only storing up problems for the future. But then again some will probably only respond to threats. Scary children...

Clearly the answer is water boarding.

[HoreTore]

Smacking children is not abuse, most of the time it doesn't even hurt it's just a way of showing an extreme displeasure and as most parents can tell you sometimes it's the only thing that will get through to a child.

I'm with the leave parenting to the parents crowd.

If you can't show "extreme displeasure" with words, then I feel a little sorry for you.

As for "most parents", I don't know anyone who thinks it is a good thing to hit their child. It may be a cultural thing, but at least here in scandinavia, parents hitting their children is seen as a thing of the past.

[doc_bean]

Isn't it illegal in most of the 'civilized' world already ?

[Husar]

If you can't show "extreme displeasure" with words, then I feel a little sorry for you.

As for "most parents", I don't know anyone who thinks it is a good thing to hit their child. It may be a cultural thing, but at least here in scandinavia, parents hitting their children is seen as a thing of the past.
Oh, I have seen women who do try to solve things with words, very strong words and lots of displeasure shown, and the kids respond with the same strong words and show their displeasure beore they end up annoying everybody around them for hours.:thumbsdown:
A small smack could sometimes solve the situation, do no harm and show the kid who's boss, it's not violence, it's a form of communication, like hugging or shaking hands, only with a negative connotation. Violence is when you beat your kids with full force until they turn blue, but that's not what smacking is about. Kids these days often blackmail their parents to discuss for hours because "if you smack me, I'll tell my teacher/the police", do you think that shows respect towards their parents? Not even teachers can always quiet kids using only words, and they are supposed to have learned that. Just have a look at schools in Berlin, some smacking is definitely necessary there.

[Ironside]

Oh dear. What has happened to Scandinavians. :no:

Inspired by the Israelis. :laugh4:

Yes, it's incorrect (Sweden was first, in 1979), but Israel does forbid smacking and have done it for quite a while. ~;p

Does anybody consider it right to dicipline thier wife or employees with a bit of smacking?


Smacking them is not abuse, most of the time it doesn't even hurt it's just a way of showing an extreme displeasure

Awww common, nothing says 'I strongly disagree' like a well delivered punch in the face, some people just react better on that, saves time.

Yes you do need other methods to dicipline your children (if they need it) without the use of smacking, but it's certainly possible and doesn't seem to change the "failure" rate much.
So those "in need of smacking" doesn't need it to turn out fine.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Does anybody consider it right to dicipline thier wife or employers with a bit of smacking?

Moroccans and German judges, apparently. ~;p

[Kralizec]

Even if it's legal, I seriously advice you not to smack your boss Ironside ~;p

[Ironside]

Even if it's legal, I seriously advice you not to smack your boss Ironside ~;p

Mumbles something about edit function thingy :stare:

[Duke Malcolm]

Bah, Humbug! I'm all for corporal punishment, and throughout my school life have always advocated the belt, slipper, cane, or tawse and written several essays to that effect.
I believe smacking children under 3 is banned in scotland, and the degree to which once can smack a child is restricted, i.e. if bruises or welts occur due it, it is illegal. But a slap across the wrist, or a clip around the ear -- which were common in the Ducal Household -- are permitted.

[doc_bean]

Little children can be extremely vulnerable if hit the wrong way, so I can see how some of these laws make sense from a medical perspective. I'm neither pro nor contra hitting your child though, if it works for you and you don't hurt the kid it's fine by me.

I'd personally advocate burning toys, giving them nothing but brussel sprouts to eat, unplugging the tv or computer or threatening to send baby pictures to a HS mailing list before smacking though.

[Husar]

Hmm, I was talking about raising kids and teaching them disciplin, morals and how to behave, your wife and boss should know that already.
My parents stopped smacking me when I grew older because at that point they could just as well talk to me, their authority was established and I became more reasonable.:sweatdrop:
Smacking the wife is about as bad as wives smacking the husband or boyfriend, which can often be seen in movies and is surprisingly not frowned upon. It's always the fault of the man.:shame:

[drone]

I'd personally advocate burning toys, giving them nothing but brussel sprouts to eat, unplugging the tv or computer or threatening to send baby pictures to a HS mailing list before smacking though.
I got both when I misbehaved, as I got older there was less spanking/smacking and more grounding/priviledge removal. Getting spanked is easy time, not being able to watch TV or get on the computer sucked big time. Much more effective. :yes:

[Blodrast]

I
Does anybody consider it right to dicipline thier wife or employees with a bit of smacking?


The difference is obvious, the wife isn't 5 years old. You can discuss with the wife, etc. The child will not always listen, and you can certainly not explain WHY some things are good and some are wrong.
How about kids throwing a tantrum ? You know, when they never listen to what you say, and couldn't hear you anyway, since they're yelling at the top of their lungs ? Yes, you can explain to him that's rude, impolite, and it bothers the people around him, for a couple of hours, until he gets tired of screaming. Or you can give in and give him whatever he wants. OR, you can smack him a good one and raise a well-behaved child, instead of one who knows he'll always get what he wants by throwing tantrums.

As for the wife aspect, you BET a bit of smacking is desirable, if applied at the appropriate moments!:2thumbsup:

[Lemur]

Well, I'm all for leaving parenting to the parents, but smacking just seems unnecessary. My papa lemur could always put the Fear of God into me with just his voice. I find I have the same ability with my little lemurs. Adding a spank or a smack to that would be redundant.

And yup, taking away privileges puts the little lemurs on the spot when necessary. But if you want to smack your kids around, I'm not the guy to stop ya.

[Goofball]

I don't think giving your child a smack should be against the law, assuming the smacks in question are not to the head or face, and are not hard enough to leave a bruise.

But having said that, I think that a parent who has to resort to smacking their child as a form of discipline/teaching is failing at a part of parenting and should consider reading a parenting book or three.

[Hepcat]

My view is identical to Blodrast and Husar. My parents only smacked me when I really deserved it, the same to my younger brother who is 14 now. Yet they never EVER punished my youngest brother who is 12 now.

They always gave him a leeway since he's youngest and whenever we reacted to his provocation we were told to just ignore him or that we should know better. He was bearable until he reached the age of 11. He doesn't have any sense of authority, he believes he is always right and will not listen to anyone else. It is only NOW that my parents realise he has behavioral problems, the problem is that he can keep his tantrum consistant for up to 5 HOURS! So often my parents can't be bothered with the hassle of trying to deal with him when they have work to do.

One example is from a few weeks ago when he was mocking my brother while he was playing a computer game, naturally after a while my brother got fed up and yelled at him. Mother came over to find out what was going on, the youngest one denies everything (this is his ultimate plan, deny everything so feverantly that my parents don't know who to believe), when my mother asked him to go off and do something else he started the tantrum with his well practiced routine.

Stage 1: WHY!!! BUT WHYYY WHYYYYYY!!!!

then Stage 2: AWWW BUT YOU NEVER BELIEVE ME, YOU ALWAYS BELIEVE THEM! THEY ARE LYING, YOU ALWAYS TELL ME TO GO AWAY!!!!

by now (usually after 30 minutes) my mother asks him to go to his room. He refuses, and remains where he is. Mum calls in Dad to take him to his room. This is where he does Stage 3:

OWWWWW!!! LET GO!!! YOU ARE HURTING MY ARM!!!!

My dad tells him, "Fine then, just don't go back by the computer." and releases him. Now that the situation has been defused he returns to sitting behind my brother and doing exactly what he was doing in the first place, or would lean closer to the screen to further annoy my brother. My parents follow him, try to tell him to go to his room and it starts all over again. :wall:

And I firmly believe this is because my parents simply didn't discipline him. The reasons they didn't when he was 11 and 12 is because they told us that his behavior is probably because of the epilepsy mediaction he had just started taking so we should stop picking on him and just ignore him. Yet since he stopped taking them at the end of last year they now realise that it was not his medication making him that way.

Anyone care to explain how words are meant to make him behave? If there is some miracle sentace to bring him to heel I'd love to know.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I think giving kids a spanking or a smack or two is sometimes needed, but it also shouldn't be done often and if it results in any sort of bruising or welting it definately goes too far. I'd rather not have it legal for teachers to smack kids around though.

As to wives/girlfriends smacking their significant others around that's not my problem unless I happen to take an interest in some very large and strong women, and even then I can just keep with my lumberjack training here in Deutschland and it still won't be a problem.

[doc_bean]

We don't not love you anymore and wish you'd just die, your brothers are good sons, that's why we believe them, you are just a worthless waste of space here.

Then when he runs away, don't go looking...

[Productivity]

Anyone care to explain how words are meant to make him behave? If there is some miracle sentace to bring him to heel I'd love to know.

Words wont help much now. Your parents made the mistake much earlier when they let the behaviour develop to the stage it is now. If when your brother had first started the problems, at a young stage he instantly had privelidges withdrawn, it wouldn't have developed. You argue that smacking is necessary now but only because your parents got it wrong in the first place. Even still, why don't they just cut off all privelidges to him now, until he stops acting like that?

[Incongruous]

Move on, welcome to the 21st century.

Hello!
Does this mean that we now have to be condescending?
How does it feel?

[caravel]

I'm afraid that smacking is something you can't put a law on either way. I will give you an example. On my way home about 2 weeks ago, I was coming out of the station and passed a group of people including a woman and her (well I assume they were her's) two young children. I would estimate the boy as about 8, and the girl around 6, possibly less. Just as I was passing the woman, shouted angrily at the boy (I don't know what, as it wasn't in english) and delivered a blow to the side of his head. Now I'm not talking about a "slap", this was more of a punch, a balled fist driven squarely into the side of the head. The sound of contact was audible. I was quite shocked, but hurried on. The group was large, and they were of a different culure to myself, so I didn't feel qualified to interfere in their business. In fact that was probably more so the job of the Police Community Support Officer, standing nearby that didn't bat an eyelid.

Edit: I need to clarify a bit. What I'm trying to get across is that she wasn't "smacking" as such, her actions were technically an assault which is already illegal. Anti smacking laws won't deter such a person that is acting illegally already.

Anyway if you outlaw smacking, where do you draw the line? What is a "smack" and what is not? For me that incident wasn't a smack it was basically phsyical abuse of a child. That child will probably go to school and carry out the same "punishments" on his fellow students. He cannot hit back at his parents so he take out his grievances on those that are more vulnerable. Violence breeds violence. Now I'm not saying I'm against smacking totally, just that if there are laws put in place against it, it won't help. There is a big difference to controlled chastisement, and hitting out in anger when a child behaves badly. Unfortunately most parent's definition of smacking in the latter.

Also there are children that don't need this kind of discipline and those that do. Every child is different and needs a different approach. The issue with children today is not simply smacking but a general lack of discipline and a sense of right and wrong.

[Incongruous]

The bid gripe with it, is that the govt. seems like it will pass it (they were attempting to rush it through the legislature) even in the face of masive public opposition. Obviuosly another example against the power of the executive.:dizzy2:

It seems to be a breach of the democratic conventions, which are vital to Westminster democracy.

[Blodrast]

Uesugi: As far as smacking your spouse, I was making a (sexual) joke.

Re kids: look, why does everybody have to specify that you can't abuse your child, you can't hit them too hard, etc ? That goes without saying !!
Did ANY of the posts who agreed with smacking imply in any way that you have to beat the **** out of your child until you leave him/her lying unconscious in a pool of blood ?! WTF. Of course smackin is NOT the same with beating up, stop insisting on that distinction, because it is clear to anybody and everybody.

The point is NOT that smacking is THE ONLY way to raise your child. I never said that. The idea is that you use smacking in ADDITION to other methods, naturally. Smacking in itself won't solve the problem, it will merely postpone it.

Like Caravel said, all kids are not the same - smacking won't even be needed for all of them. The idea is that you smack them, but you also must explain to them WHY you're smacking them - because they disobeyed you, because what they did was wrong, and why it was wrong.
However, there's a problem - you can only start explaining such things to them once they're old enough - which, again, depends from kid to kid. A 5 year old is NOT gonna be able to distinguish between good and bad (heck, adults still have problems with those decisions :P), it will only distinguish between your "Yes" and "No". And, if, after repeating the "No" several times, it has had no effect, a smacking will.

As for putting this into law, well, lemme quote a certain movie that's playing these days: "This ... Is ... Madness!"
Why the hell doesn't the gov't take my child altogether, since obviously they know better than me how to raise him/her ?
How about the abuse this will encourage on the part of social services ?
Think of all the nosy buggers with nothing better to do than stick their noses in their neighour's businesses, and call social services as soon as they think there might be some "child abuse" going on.

Look, there will ALWAYS be irresponsible parents. Can't avoid that. However, in most cases, the child is better off raised with his parents, and within a family, than in an orphanage.

Also, what's gonna happen if, say, a parent "abuses" their child ? Take the child away ? Great, we all know orphanages are splendid environments to form young men and women into healthy, normal adults who will integrate into society without problems. Gonna put the parent in jail ? Well, who's gonna take care of the kid in the meantime ? Gonna have the parent pay a hefty fine ? And don't you think the kid will suffer because of that, too, if you run the parent into poverty ?

Idiotic Law. But hey, maybe they'll finally put all those cameras in our apartments so they can figure out right away when an abuse is taking place. I mean, c'mon, Think Of The Children !!11

[ICantSpellDawg]

the modern world is ridiculous and repressive. i wish dueling was still legal.

NZ'ers should have a national "Slap your child in the face" day to respond to this law.

[Bijo]

Frag, even though I ain't ya poppa, I will smack you too, and I don't even know why. *smacks Fragony* :laugh4:


But now to be serious and quick...

Basic point is discipline. As long they're being raised well, disciplined and such, within normal boundaries of okay behaviour. If that means smacking is needed, then so be it.
Too much discipline is not good, though, I think. And no discipline at all is plain bad as well. A balance must be there.
Personally I think most countries should just activate the levy again (or whatchamehcallit). If those children haven't been properly disciplined throughout time, they will be in the army at a teen age of, what, 18?

[Samurai Waki]

I get smacked by my Fiancee on a regular basis, but its usually because I make demeaning remarks towards her gender. :stars:

Edit: Always in Good Fun of course.