I disagree.

Corporal punishment administered in a considered and sparing way in early years is a form of discipline that is understood, quick, easy and leads to a reduction in recidivism in later years. For those that don't agree, you only have to look at the total disregard for the law from rioting youths, to assault, to road rage, to inconsiderate attitudes to others that was minimal 50 years ago when punishment was inflicted on the backside of many a youth and he grew up with an understanding that certain things were unacceptable in a community. It worked then and is one of the reasons why we now have such a selfish society, because we live in an environment that panders to the young and their so called rights.

That's classic, snake.

>>For those that don't agree, you only have to look at the total disregard for the law from rioting youths, to assault, to road rage, to inconsiderate attitudes to others that was minimal 50 years ago when punishment was inflicted on the backside of many a youth and he grew up with an understanding that certain things were unacceptable in a community. It worked then and is one of the reasons why we now have such a selfish society<<

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

Go look it up.

My own view, tried and tested through raising three very well-adjusted and socially acceptable children, is that to resort to corporal punishment of any kind against children is an admission of weakness on the part of the beater.

The article however concerns itself primarily with the legal basis for inflicting such punishment on children. The idea that the line between "smacking" and child abuse can be determined by legislation, and that a position either side of that line will in future be argued by lawyers, smells to me like special pleading on the part of those who will earn money from the task.

The article does not, possibly for these reasons, cover existing legislation, but I suspect that our current assault laws are perfectly adequate to detect the abuse of children. Can anyone point to situations where they are lacking?

Snake the problem with that argument is that there does not appear to be evidence that anti-social kid's are necessarily from non-smacking homes. They may well be from ones where discipline is inconsistantly administered, thumped at times, ignored at others.

To the article
Strangly enough children are not adult's. They don't have adult reasoning or adult consequences and attempts to discuss smacking as a rights issue seem to ignore that "minor" fact. Parents and children come with differing temperments, abilities and attitudes. One size does not fit all.

Some kid's have a remarkable ability to dismiss most of the non-physical consequences and often don't do well at considering longer term consequences. In the heat of rage the risk of loosing some favorite toy or entertainment for a sustained period is not relevant to them nor are most other non-physical disciplines.

Some parents don't do well with the complexities of nuanced discipline especially where the child is keen to work around that discipline.

TBC

R0bert

Part 2

There is credible evidence that large amounts of physical discipline correlate to a relatively small increase in the likelyhood of adult violence. A lack of any consistant discipline is far more likely to lead to significant problems than small amounts of physical discipline used to back up other strategies. There is some evidence (not conclusive as I understand it) that outcomes can be better for children where physical discipline is one of the strategies used at a young age than for children where it's not.

Emotional abuse of children is far more likely to lead to long term harm to those children than small amounts of physical discipline.

Serious physical assult leading to injury is a different matter. The deliberate linking of serious assault to smacking ignores that people need to make distinctions about levels in all forms of discipline. Sitting a kid in a thinking corner is different to chaining them in the dog house for the weekend. Telling them that a behaviour was inappropriate is different to telling them that they are a useless piece of s#%t.

The goal should be to give parents access to the best set of tools to raise children allowing for the differences in all human beings.

Physical discipline should never be the first port of call, it should never be at a level that leads to injury but it also needs to be remembered that children are not adults with adult reasoning and consequences.

R0bert

In spite of your latin quotation Pericles, ! do think there is causal correlation between the lack of physical discipline and anti social behaviour. However, You will notice that right at the beginning I modified my approach to it by saying "considered and sparingly".

Of course there are alternative forms of discipline and they should always be used first and I agree with the other posters that there should be consistency so that a child knows what is expected of him/her, but I have observed enough children admonished constantly with no effective results when a short smack on the backside would be quick and sharp enough to get the desired result. A child that knows the rules and abides by them is a happy child, rather than one that is constantly shouted at and abused.

It is somewhat similar to that of a trained dog such as those used by law enforcement or the blind. They know their boundaries and are trained with affection. Unfortunately children are more astute and if they think they can get away with something, they push those boundaries when ever they can....... Now I can see that I will be criticised for making THAT comparison !

It is too large a subject to discuss within a few paragraphs and I am ambivalent on both sides of the argument, but I still remain adamant that there is place for corporal punishment which certainly worked for me.

It is time to get these ratbags, out of our lives, & definitely out of our homes.

Apparently the only folk capable of thinking are doctors, [pretty often unsuccessful at their jobs, & lawyers, the people most likely to use lies as part of their business], according to them anyway.

If you want proof that corporal punishment works, just go walk down a Singapore street at night, & feel safe, then walk down some near city street in most large Oz cities, & see how safe you feel.

Bring back the strap, & cane, & all but the elites will be safer, yes even the thugs.