Celivia, attitudes to this probably depend on how bad you perceive smacking to be. I'm somewhat in favour of it as a last resort tactic rather than a never do. I've also seen and heard to much of kids who consider themselves bush lawyers, they quite defiantly inform adults of their rights as they continue dangerous behaviour (you can't touch me and I can do what I like).

If the campaign is not done right it may just make that situation worse with kids who want to test boundaries (or who are suffering from PITAS - Pain In The Arse Syndrome) making it that much harder for adults trying to raise them to do so.

Kids are not subject to the same consequences as adults, nor should they have the same rights. They needs rights and protections which meet their needs and one of those needs is to have effective boundaries otherwise with some kids we end up with adults with no regard for others and unable and unwilling to moderate their behaviour.

I suspect that the campaign may do real harm if it's a prohibition message rather than an appropriate use message.

R0bert

Celivia

Love your work and would love to meet you, but you're married yes? Hopefully, No? Thinking of divorce? Sorry, but you're one of the most intelligent women posting here and I can't help myself sometimes....

Extraordinary, that a topic about corporal punishment, which many believe IS child abuse (note how many who think its OK to smack, were themselves smacked as kids?) has so little discussion on what truly is abusive. That fully grown adults think it is OK to wack someone a fraction of their size and strength, is appalling.

But what is truly woeful is the scant attention on religious abuse. Of course it has not escaped my notice that this topic was authored by a Christian, who remains in favour of hitting his children. Maybe other posters are too cowed to dare disagree, Gra-Gra is very pedantic as Rainier would attest. (BTW class move, Rainier, inviting the big man of OLO over for some edification).

On the subject of corporal punishment seemingly supported by the religious I have to ask: what would Jesus do?

Somehow, I can't see Him being all that big on hitting the defenceless. No doubt some bible basher will cherry pick some obscure reference to 'prove' that Jesus was into child abuse. Hmmmm. Now that would be interesting. And explain all those Catholic priests.....

All corporal punishment teaches is that violence is appropriate. How many thugs got their start in violence from demos by their dad or mum?

BTW R0bert, for someone who loves to protest the violence he received at the hands of his ex, I am astounded that you find no problem with hitting your son.

Guess this just proves that violence breeds further violence.

The simple truth is that rules, boundaries and values can be set without use of violence. Those who succumb to it are short on patience, long on self-importance and devoid of respect for the well-being of others.

Should our taxes be spent on outlawing corporal punishment?

No.

Our money would be better spent on education encompassing anger management, negotiation skills and the like.

THE tension between US movie-star exes Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger erupted when an angry phone message from Baldwin to his daughter was made public.

LISTEN TO this jerk go off at an 11 year old.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21589704-7642,00.html

Rainier, the worst aspect of that recording is that it was apparently leaked by the mother as part of her battle with the father. There's abuse alright, but the mother would appear to be the one most guilty. Imagine using your daughter like that! It's a pretty good example of what I was talking about. Some want to criminalise a tap on the bottom, while excusing behaviour which is much more mentally scarring.

Obviously, Ireland wasn’t looking forward to contact with her dad because it wouldn’t have been the first time he was verbally abusive. Who could blame her for switching off her phone?
Will she look forward to her father’s visit after his threat to straighten her out? No, of course not.
The man is out of control and needs to be straightened out himself.
I feel deeply sorry for the girl that she is caught in the middle of two fighting, crazy adults.

GY
Who wants to criminalise a tap on the bottom but to excuse verbal abuse- not me!
Countries, which have banned smacking, banned it because it is very hard to draw a line of what is abuse and what is not.
It would be too hard to police- to allow some forms of smacking and disallow other.
The message that comes with smacking is that it’s OK to use violence to solve problems.
Smacking is unnecessary because there are positive parenting methods- which should be promoted. I am hoping the campaign will focus on this.


I find it frustrating that some of you still think that if you don’t slap or smack children, they will have no boundaries, no regard for others, run wild, cause riots etc. This is caused by bad parenting. Refraining from using physical punishments does not equate bad parenting. Not smacking does not mean ignoring bad behaviour.

RObert,
you thought that your parents' punishment of your behaviour was justified but not all children think that.
My husband’s parents smacked him and he hated them for it.

JR,
thank you, you’re funny…but I’m off the shelf, mate ;)
You’re making a great point about Jesus- something for the Christians to think about. I wonder what their answer to your question will be...
Indeed, education about positive parenting is of uttermost importance and anger management is, so it seems, badly needed.

We are, as a society, all responsible for the treatment of our future citizens in our communities. Do we prefer that our future citizens are being raised in safe, non-violent homes?

GY, nothing there I would not disagree with, especially in terms of using the recording [and thus the child] for reasons of spite and legal points scoring. What is not revealed is whether or not the child allowed to answer the phone by the mother – thus frustrating the father. That he spoke to this 12 year old like she was a dog reveals it all.

And this proves that in this case both parents are equally guilty and don't deserve custody rights at all.

We spend far too much time arguing about the respective property rights we as adult have over children without examining the inherent rights of children to declare what they want.

From my perspective the . . . child [does] not become; it is becoming itself that is a child – I see these rights to declare as rights that belong to the beings they are in the present, rather than to the adults they will become.