TOPIC GUIDE: Smacking
"The UK should ban smacking of children"
PUBLISHED: 01 Jan 2014
AUTHOR: David Bowden
Share this Topic Guide:
While corporal punishment of children was heavily restricted in the UK by the Children’s Act of 2004, it remains legal for parents or guardians to use ‘reasonable chastisement’ to discipline under-18s in their care. The continued existence of this provision, however, remains highly contentious. In December 2013 Dr Maggie Atkinson, the Children’s Commissioner for England, re-opened the debate by stating her personal view that the UK government should seek a total ban, on the basis that it was ‘counter-evidential’ to forbid the use of violence against other adults but not children [Ref: Independent]. Supporters of a full ban on smacking, including campaigns groups such as the NSPCC, argue that the UK’s support for smacking has drawn censure from the UN and that its underlying principle of ‘might is right’ has no place in 21st century parenting [Ref: Yahoo News]. Yet others argue that parents should feel legitimate in using mild physical force to discipline their children and that a ban would represent excessive interference by the state into private family life. In 2011, following the London riots, Labour MP David Lammy argued that parents’ fears they would be prosecuted for smacking their children had contributed to social breakdown and a crisis in adult authority [Ref: BBC News]. Other politicians, including Mayor of London Boris Johnson and Justice Minister Chris Grayling, have offered their support for the current law and point towards strong public opinion on the issue [Ref: Daily Mail]. Should the government follow the lead of 22 other European countries and afford equal legal protection to children from physical force? Or is it important to defend the right of parents to exercise discipline in raising their children as they see fit?
For further reading use the menu bar on the right hand side.
Smacking DEBATE IN CONTEXT
This section provides a summary of the key issues in the debate, set in the context of recent discussions and the competing positions that have been adopted.
What is ‘reasonable chastisement’?
Under the Children Act 2004 parents, or those acting in loco parentis, are able to administer physical force provided it does not leave grazing, bruising, swelling or breaking of skin and cannot be used as a defence in serious assault charges [Ref: The Times] – in Scotland the use of an implement is expressly forbidden. In 2010 the Singleton Report tightened this up further, but upheld parents’ right to issue a ‘mild smack’ [Ref: BBC News]. Campaigners maintain, however, that even this current freedom exposes children to a range of potential harms and impairs child development [Ref: Al Jazeera], although the extent of this is heavily disputed [Ref: Herald Scotland]. As one supporter of the ban notes, this is a debate less about the evidential question of harm than it is about the principles: should society endorse and protect the use of force against children as part of modern parenting? [Ref: New Statesman].
Spare the rod, spoil the child?
Proponents of a ban argue that smacking based upon outdated notions of discipline: pointing towards corporal punishment’s increasing unacceptability in other aspects of life [Ref: politics.co.uk]. Furthermore it is maintained that it is less effective than other forms of discipline, and that the current law encourages unnecessary uses of force [Ref: Huffington Post]. As others note, however, there is no strong evidence to suggest the current law allows ‘violent assault’ against minors beyond its current provisions [Ref: Independent]. It is argued that the ban’s supporters are guilty of elevating personal preferences over parenting styles that are not necessarily any more or less enlightened than the non-violent alternatives they espouse [Ref: Telegraph]. Given the government states it does not ‘condone’ smacking as a method, are they justified in allowing it to be used?
The state and the family
For many the debate over smacking is about much more than the act itself. Attempts by politicians to associate restrictions on smacking with the London riots have been criticised by numerous campaigners as being simplistic and opportunistic [Ref: Guardian]. Nonetheless, several of the writers on both sides express a strong anxiety that the state has gone too far in undermining the authority of parents at the expense of protecting children who, after all, are widely accepted as needing adult supervision and guidance [Ref: spiked]. In practice, the ban’s implementation would remove what many perceive as a grey area yet would also require considerably more state intervention into child-care and family life. Should the government follow numerous other Western countries in acting to provide equality for potentially vulnerable children at the risk of criminalising adults? Or should society affirm the right of parents to administer appropriate discipline at their discretion, even if many may consider it distasteful?
It is crucial for debaters to have read the articles in this section, which provide essential information and arguments for and against the debate motion. Students will be expected to have additional evidence and examples derived from independent research, but they can expect to be criticised if they lack a basic familiarity with the issues raised in the essential reading.
Nermin Oomer Yahoo News 7 January 2014
Emily Dugan Independent 27 December 2013
BBC News 16 September 2011
Lindsay Whittle Huffington Post 10 September 2013
Siobhan Courtney Al Jazeera 16 March 2013
Glosswitch New Statesman 4 February 2013
Zoe Williams Guardian 30 January 2012
Gerri Peev Daily Mail 4 February 2013
Cristina Odone Telegraph 3 February 2013
Ellie Rose Independent 5 October 2012
BBC News 24 January 2012
Jennie Bristow spiked 17 July 2012
Vicky Allan Herald Scotland 7 November 2010
Simon Jenkins The Times 7 July 2004
Definitions of key concepts that are crucial for understanding the topic. Students should be familiar with these terms and the different ways in which they are used and interpreted and should be prepared to explain their significance.
Useful websites and materials that provide a good starting point for research.
Alicia Jones Current Legal Issues Blog 13 January 2014
LBC 12 December 2013
Battle of Ideas 20 October 2012
NHS Choices 3 July 2012
Department of Education 1 June 2012
Bonnie Gardiner YouGov 22 February 2012
LBC 29 January 2012
Sir Roger Singleton HM Government March 2010
Family & Parenting Institute October 2007
Christian Institute 2004
HM Government 2004
Save The Children January 2002
Links to organisations, campaign groups and official bodies who are referenced within the Topic Guide or which will be of use in providing additional research information.
IN THE NEWS
Relevant recent news stories from a variety of sources, which ensure students have an up to date awareness of the state of the debate.
Guardian 10 January 2014
Scotsman 29 December 2013
Daily Mail 12 December 2013
BBC News 21 June 2013
Telegraph 18 April 2013
Telegraph 22 January 2013
Total Politics 30 January 2012
London Evening Standard 30 January 2012
Channel 4 News 29 January 2012
BBC News 30 March 2010
BBC News 25 October 2007
This site contains links to websites operated by parties other than Debating Matters. Although we make every effort to ensure links are current, they will sometimes break after Topic Guide publication. If a link does not work, then the publication reference and date should enable you to find an alternate link. If you find a broken link do please send it to the webmaster for review.
TOPIC GUIDE MENU
Select the relevant option
Related topic guides