Can we please leave the “If you hit your dog you could be arrested, but it’s legal to hit your child" argument out of it. I can walk into any pet store and most supermarket's and buy a choker chain or an electric collar to train my dog with. As well as muzzles. Items that use pain and force to control. It is a completely ridiculous argument.
I hate smacking my children and would love to learn a more effective way of teaching them to be reasonable and happy adults. But where and how do I learn? Every book I have read and every method I have tried isn't working.(I have heaps of methods that work great for most things, but sadly when all else fails find smacking to be the only thing that works)
Efforts should be made to give parents the tools to avoid smacking rather then tell then "You are wrong, you are an abuser. Do something different"

Bec,

I expect you'll find as your children grow older and are more inclined to accept instruction, that there are other ways of disciplining them.

Consistency and well-defined boundaries are really what most young people find the most reassuring.

Poirot,

So its ok for the author to call me, my father along with most Australiuans who have smacked a child an abuser but not okay to point out the obvious (that children need discipline due to their adamic nature). I take it you think this hypocrisy is acceptable.

Of course the author along with other social engineers remain in complete denial as to the obvious link in the rise of violence in society since most were either deceived or to gutless to properly discipline their children. They are the ones still dumb enough to ask why their children can't say no to drugs, perversion, promiscurity and rebellion.

runner,

There are myriad reasons for the decline of standards in our society.

People not walloping their kids is probably a minor factor.

I think you'll find that most parents "still" give their tots light smacks in lieu of being able to reason with them - even now.

Like I said in another thread, we've managed to raise two respectful individuals without the need for a regime of ongoing corporal punishment.

Poirot

I notice you conveniently ignored the accusation of 'abuser' to anyone who has smacked their child. You seem to hold a view that such an approach is acceptable if you 'agree ' with their view. Gross hyprocrisy on display. As pointed out before the only thing that 'smacks of denial' here is the simple observation that kids acting like brats need a smack.

yes fatherless children, feminism, the failure to discipline in any effective manner and the victim mentality all add to the decline to standards in society. None more so than the selective rejection of absolutes.

Poirot, I do indeed find that now I do not need to smack my 6yr old very much. I am able to reason and explain and "help" her to make sensible choices. My 22mth old son however is not so keen to listen, he would rather turn himself inside out throwing a tantrum. Whilst I am happy to ignore his 5min to 90min tantrum (because I won't give him what he wants) I find that the general public are not. And will instead give me dirty looks and complaints. You say that people give children smacks "in lieu" of reasoning with them...what if the child is unable to be reasoned with?

Runner, I don't think it is fair to call Poirot a hypocrite for having an opinion, I have found his/her points to be both informative and interesting. And not the least bit hypocritical. I agree with him/her that there are so many other factors associated with the decline in society's standards and that in a lot of cases it is not lack of a smack that has caused children (or adults) to misbehave but a lack of any care, love or discipline at all.