Aberystwyth University
Should smacking children be made illegal?
Physical harm against another adult is illegal across the UK, but reasonable force when 'smacking' children in England and Wales is not.
Scotland has banned smacking by making any physical punishment against a child a punishable offence. England and Wales haven't, but Wales is considering following Scotland’s example.
My question to everyone is while we have varying standards around smacking children in England and Wales, should children have the right to be protected from physical punishment in the same way as adults are protected?
What psychological reasons might parents and policy makers use to support for and against the banning of smacking in Wales?
Gareth is a Senior Lecturer in Social Psychology at Aberystwyth University in Wales. My main goal is to examine the relevance of social psychology in understanding everyday social issues and how such issues, like group and intergroup behaviour, body image, and life skills development are amplified through everyday practices, such as during our leisure time (e.g., sport, physical activity).
Detailed analysis below:
In the UK, it is illegal for a parent or carer to use unreasonable force against a child (and adult for that matter) for punishment, and this has led to variability in judging what ‘reasonable’ force means.
Factors that are used to make this judgement include:
- the age and sex of a child
- the force used by the adult.
What is clear in law is that injury and actual bodily harm (i.e., grazes, bruising, swelling) is illegal and past practices, such as corporal punishment and smacking in schools and nursery is now banned.
In Scotland, the term 'reasonable force' has been removed from law and makes any physical punishment against a child a punishable offence. In Wales a similar focus upon reasonable force as punishment has been targeted by the Welsh Government as it is seen as a ‘loophole’ across England and Wales to justify hitting one’s children.
(https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/25/smacking-children-to-be-banned-in-wales)
The problem
A common argument against banning smacking, usually comes from those opposed to banning smacking typically is along the lines of “I was smacked and it never did me harm” – see here for further reading (Kish & Newcombe, 2015). The contradiction here is that those who were smacked tend to be those who also wish to continue the practice. There are of course plenty of people who were never smacked and turned out ok, too – some may support the use of smacking while others might not.
Psychologically though, the issue remains the same around mimicking and normalisation of aggression. For decades, policy has tried to intervene by restricting the violence we see on TV and music we hear, and the idea is the same with smacking – if children see it and hear it – they will do. Consider this advert as an illustration of the psychological reasoning behind it:
[video="youtube;KHi2dxSf9hw"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHi2dxSf9hw[/video]
However, the problem is actually an adult one because as adults we expect, from other adults to be protected by law against any assault especially as a disciplinary measure for poor work performance, bad behaviour, and incentive to be positive. For example, as adults we expect that if we hit someone we might be hit back or severely punished by our freedoms restricted through imprisonment, but we also expect through shared consensus that for society to operate with some structure it is in everyone’s interest that we do not hit each other.
If we as adults know and agree that hitting as punishment to correct behaviour is good for children, then why do we still grow up to be violent. Moreover, if it works, why is hitting adults also wrong?
Scotland has banned smacking by making any physical punishment against a child a punishable offence. England and Wales haven't, but Wales is considering following Scotland’s example.
My question to everyone is while we have varying standards around smacking children in England and Wales, should children have the right to be protected from physical punishment in the same way as adults are protected?
What psychological reasons might parents and policy makers use to support for and against the banning of smacking in Wales?
Gareth is a Senior Lecturer in Social Psychology at Aberystwyth University in Wales. My main goal is to examine the relevance of social psychology in understanding everyday social issues and how such issues, like group and intergroup behaviour, body image, and life skills development are amplified through everyday practices, such as during our leisure time (e.g., sport, physical activity).
Detailed analysis below:
In the UK, it is illegal for a parent or carer to use unreasonable force against a child (and adult for that matter) for punishment, and this has led to variability in judging what ‘reasonable’ force means.
Factors that are used to make this judgement include:
- the age and sex of a child
- the force used by the adult.
What is clear in law is that injury and actual bodily harm (i.e., grazes, bruising, swelling) is illegal and past practices, such as corporal punishment and smacking in schools and nursery is now banned.
In Scotland, the term 'reasonable force' has been removed from law and makes any physical punishment against a child a punishable offence. In Wales a similar focus upon reasonable force as punishment has been targeted by the Welsh Government as it is seen as a ‘loophole’ across England and Wales to justify hitting one’s children.
(https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/25/smacking-children-to-be-banned-in-wales)
The problem
A common argument against banning smacking, usually comes from those opposed to banning smacking typically is along the lines of “I was smacked and it never did me harm” – see here for further reading (Kish & Newcombe, 2015). The contradiction here is that those who were smacked tend to be those who also wish to continue the practice. There are of course plenty of people who were never smacked and turned out ok, too – some may support the use of smacking while others might not.
Psychologically though, the issue remains the same around mimicking and normalisation of aggression. For decades, policy has tried to intervene by restricting the violence we see on TV and music we hear, and the idea is the same with smacking – if children see it and hear it – they will do. Consider this advert as an illustration of the psychological reasoning behind it:
[video="youtube;KHi2dxSf9hw"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHi2dxSf9hw[/video]
However, the problem is actually an adult one because as adults we expect, from other adults to be protected by law against any assault especially as a disciplinary measure for poor work performance, bad behaviour, and incentive to be positive. For example, as adults we expect that if we hit someone we might be hit back or severely punished by our freedoms restricted through imprisonment, but we also expect through shared consensus that for society to operate with some structure it is in everyone’s interest that we do not hit each other.
If we as adults know and agree that hitting as punishment to correct behaviour is good for children, then why do we still grow up to be violent. Moreover, if it works, why is hitting adults also wrong?
(edited 4 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
I don't agree with any adult physically harming a child in order to show discipline. You'd quite rightly be arrested if you hit another person in the street and they called the police so why should it be any different for a parent/caregiver to hit a child? All it does is teach children that they can control other people and get their own way by physically hurting others.
As stated before, the only defence I also ever hear in favour of smacking is "well I was smacked and I turned out fine" and that's great for those in that position but there are plenty of damaged adults out there today who are now struggling as a direct result of being smacked as a child. Ultimately you can never predict how a child will react long-term to being hit - some can cope with it and accept it as part of their childhood, they won't suffer any ~repercussions~ so to speak, but others, like myself, will end up with a myriad of problems that will affect them for years to come. The safest way to avoid this is simply not smacking your child in the first place. It is a shame that people seem unable to find another, healthier form of discipline.
As for children copying behaviour they see, I made the concrete decision never to smack any child a long time ago. It is easy to see how people swing the other way though, the more normalised aggressive behaviour and attitudes become, the more likely people are to engage in it themselves.
As stated before, the only defence I also ever hear in favour of smacking is "well I was smacked and I turned out fine" and that's great for those in that position but there are plenty of damaged adults out there today who are now struggling as a direct result of being smacked as a child. Ultimately you can never predict how a child will react long-term to being hit - some can cope with it and accept it as part of their childhood, they won't suffer any ~repercussions~ so to speak, but others, like myself, will end up with a myriad of problems that will affect them for years to come. The safest way to avoid this is simply not smacking your child in the first place. It is a shame that people seem unable to find another, healthier form of discipline.
As for children copying behaviour they see, I made the concrete decision never to smack any child a long time ago. It is easy to see how people swing the other way though, the more normalised aggressive behaviour and attitudes become, the more likely people are to engage in it themselves.
(edited 4 years ago)
Aberystwyth University
Deliberately physically harming a person in any way, most of all a child, should without a doubt be punishable by law. However, the words "hit", "smack" and "spank" should not be used interchangeably. To hit somebody is to forcefully strike them, usually to cause pain, whereas a spank is merely a remonstrative tap. I would never hit an animal, and would despise anybody who did, but giving my cat a painless tap on the nose to teach her not to steal food is completely different. Similarly, it's natural and very healthy for a parent to have a strong physical bond with their child and to communicate with them through their body, and this can include the occasional painless slap to establish a safety boundary, particularly with toddlers who need to understand quickly that certain things are dangerous. If that's aggression, telling someone off is verbal abuse.
The phrasing "unreasonable force" is definitely ambiguous and should be ammended, but spanking shouldn't be outlawed altogether.
The phrasing "unreasonable force" is definitely ambiguous and should be ammended, but spanking shouldn't be outlawed altogether.
Original post by the bear
we need more discipline for our young folk. our inner city estates are infested with gangs of feral youths who do exactly what they want and play the police for fools. a taste of the birch is just what they need.
If the police were to use corporal punishment on delinquent youths, it would only reinforce marginalised young people's sense that the authorities are against them and don't understand them.
Original post by Gwil
If the police were to use corporal punishment on delinquent youths, it would only reinforce marginalised young people's sense that the authorities are against them and don't understand them.
young people are never in the wrong are they ?
So I can't keep the cricket bat for when I have kids? 
Original post by the bear
young people are never in the wrong are they ?
Of course they can be, as can all sections of the population. My point is that if you want to turn them into law-abiding citizens, corporal punishment may be counter-productive.
Original post by Gwil
Of course they can be, as can all sections of the population. My point is that if you want to turn them into law-abiding citizens, corporal punishment may be counter-productive.
i guess we need a controlled experiment with two randomized groups of ne'er do wells ;
group A gets a gentle talking to and a mars bar for kicking the **** out of pensioners
group B gets a sound thrashing and are forced to wear orange jumpsuits
this would make a wonderful research project, no ?
Original post by Gwil
Of course they can be, as can all sections of the population. My point is that if you want to turn them into law-abiding citizens, corporal punishment may be counter-productive.
Don't mind him, spanking is his kink.
A trillion percent YES YES AND YES! Smacking is teaching kids that hitting will solve anything and will hit their kids own too! This is a bad trait to have and can lead to aggression. There is a mature way to distract kids from doing something they shouldn't be in a calm and controlled manner. You can ground them, exclude them from their phones but stay clear of any physical treatment as nothing good will come out of it!
not really. If it was causing bruises and broken bones and loss of hair and limbs and long term injuries then yeah it probably should be illegal. (and I think it already is anyway)
as long as there's no bruises and stuff it should be fine and legal.
as long as there's no bruises and stuff it should be fine and legal.
Original post by the bear
i guess we need a controlled experiment with two randomized groups of ne'er do wells ;
group A gets a gentle talking to and a mars bar for kicking the **** out of pensioners
group B gets a sound thrashing and are forced to wear orange jumpsuits
this would make a wonderful research project, no ?
group A gets a gentle talking to and a mars bar for kicking the **** out of pensioners
group B gets a sound thrashing and are forced to wear orange jumpsuits
this would make a wonderful research project, no ?
In that situation i'd want to know what was the pensioner doing there in the first place? And what did the pensioner say to get smacked? You know how mouthy pensioners can be giving it all, "Back in my day..." and "When I was in the great war...".
Original post by Daigan
In that situation i'd want to know what was the pensioner doing there in the first place? And what did the pensioner say to get smacked? You know how mouthy pensioners can be giving it all, "Back in my day..." and "When I was in the great war...".
they are asking for a good kicking with all of their "do you know what i got this medal for ?" nonsense
Original post by the beer
Don't mind him, spanking is his kink.
shut up name plagiarist
Original post by Dunya
So I can't keep the cricket bat for when I have kids?
you trying to bludgeon them to a pulp or something!?
Original post by the bear
i guess we need a controlled experiment with two randomized groups of ne'er do wells ;
group A gets a gentle talking to and a mars bar for kicking the **** out of pensioners
group B gets a sound thrashing and are forced to wear orange jumpsuits
this would make a wonderful research project, no ?
group A gets a gentle talking to and a mars bar for kicking the **** out of pensioners
group B gets a sound thrashing and are forced to wear orange jumpsuits
this would make a wonderful research project, no ?
That's a bit of a straw man argument, since neither Group A nor Group B's punishment would be particularly effective. Rather than a one-off "gentle talking to", what we need is a long-term plan of action to engage with delinquent young people and to assess their needs and problems. Before people who have been behaving in an anti-social manner will get back on the "straight and narrow", a sense of trust, dignity and responsibility is prerequisite. Your "sound thrashing" would break that.
Original post by Leviathan1611
you trying to bludgeon them to a pulp or something!?
Original post by Gwil
That's a bit of a straw man argument, since neither Group A nor Group B's punishment would be particularly effective. Rather than a one-off "gentle talking to", what we need is a long-term plan of action to engage with delinquent young people and to assess their needs and problems. Before people who have been behaving in an anti-social manner will get back on the "straight and narrow", a sense of trust, dignity and responsibility is prerequisite. Your "sound thrashing" would break that.
tsk.... these young villains have very short attention spans. they are not going to buy into extended mollycoddling sessions by sandal-wearing non-judgementalists. they need a short sharp shock.
The main thing to keep in mind is human behavioural biology and psychology.
Hitting a kid is the easy way out for lazy parents who do not have the will to, the interest to, or simply the social skills to address their child’s issue from the root. Instead, hitting them in hopes that they associate the pain with the habit creates a guilty pleasure sort of feeling attached to that. Not only will the kids do it again once their parents are out of sight, they will get a kick out of it as they directly oppose authority.
As of the ‘I turned out okay’ argument, not everyone deserves the right to vote on an issue they are subjectively biased towards in an ill-informed way or do not have the knowledge to think about. It’s Socrates election argument on democracy. I do not need statistical evidence to show that these people regularly suffer from mental disorders today and do not have their lives together, but if you put these people on the charts, I’m sure you’d find unemployment, suicide and financial instability significantly higher.
We have had a bad generation grow up and the world around us is another piece of evidence to see. Gen Y or the daycare generation has still proven to be better.
Hitting a kid is the easy way out for lazy parents who do not have the will to, the interest to, or simply the social skills to address their child’s issue from the root. Instead, hitting them in hopes that they associate the pain with the habit creates a guilty pleasure sort of feeling attached to that. Not only will the kids do it again once their parents are out of sight, they will get a kick out of it as they directly oppose authority.
As of the ‘I turned out okay’ argument, not everyone deserves the right to vote on an issue they are subjectively biased towards in an ill-informed way or do not have the knowledge to think about. It’s Socrates election argument on democracy. I do not need statistical evidence to show that these people regularly suffer from mental disorders today and do not have their lives together, but if you put these people on the charts, I’m sure you’d find unemployment, suicide and financial instability significantly higher.
We have had a bad generation grow up and the world around us is another piece of evidence to see. Gen Y or the daycare generation has still proven to be better.
a kid will only touch a hot stove once 
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Epq ideas
- Why do schools ignore bullying?
- my 16 year old girlfriend wants me to go prom with her
- Never start vaping, says 12-year-old girl with lung damage
- Can someone please give feedback on my Paper 2 Question 5 introduction
- Im 18 and my parents still hit me
- Thoughts on Abortion?
- can someone mark my english language question 5 please (40)
- Jobs for a 15-year-old, if any?
- What would you do?
- Friend up to no good
- Waitress job dodgy?
- Bakewell Tarts OR Doughnuts?
- Can you still wear a face mask in public?
- To have exam threads get closed after results day
- Polo gti 1.4l as first car
- Shouldn't Euthanasia be made freely available to all sick old people now? because
- driving test crash
- UCAS - autism and other mental health disclosures: risk of rejection?
- Debate Help!!!
Latest
Trending
Last reply 6 days ago
The Official Aberystwyth Applicants for 2024 Entry ThreadLast reply 1 month ago
How long will it take for me to get my Aberystwyth entrance exam results?Trending
Last reply 6 days ago
The Official Aberystwyth Applicants for 2024 Entry ThreadLast reply 1 month ago
How long will it take for me to get my Aberystwyth entrance exam results?
