SMACK YOUR CHILD, FACE THE COURTS
As Scotland outlaws physical punishment, critics warn caring parents will now be criminalised...
SMACKING a child is to be made illegal in Scotland in a move critics said will ‘criminalise’ parents.
Campaigners say simply tapping a child on the hand could now result in parents being dragged through the courts.
It follows a vote by MSPs yesterday in favour of scrapping the defence of ‘reasonable chastisement’ – meaning parents and carers will no longer be allowed to use physical punishment when disciplining youngsters.
The controversial move makes Scotland the first country in the United Kingdom to introduce such a ban.
In an emotional debate at Holyrood, the Scottish Government was urged to rewrite the legislation amid fears it could also see parents criminalised for threatening their children or raising their voices. However,
ministers moved ahead with plans to back a Member’s Bill that was put forward by Green MSP John Finnie – with MSPs voting 84 to 29 in favour of the ban last night.
Children will now have the same protection as adults, with the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) Bill removing the defence of ‘reasonable chastisement’ or ‘justifiable assault’ from the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003.
Last night, Scottish Children’s Minister Maree Todd said the move removed ‘an outdated provision that has no place in a modern Scotland’.
Mr Finnie hailed his Bill as a ‘historic and courageous’ move.
However, campaigners said they were deeply disappointed by the decision and raised fears over the impact it could have on families across Scotland.
Jamie Gillies, of campaign group Be Reasonable, said: ‘We are disappointed, and lots of parents across Scotland will be disappointed with the change in law.
‘This opens the door to hundreds of families being investigated and parents potentially prosecuted for smacking. This is massively opposed in the polls.
‘Our campaign will continue to stand up for good parents.
‘We believe we represent the silent majority of people who will see this as intrusive and unnecessary. We will fight for the repeal and amendments to this Bill.’
The vote to pass the legislation followed a fiery and emotional debate – with the SNP Government accused of pushing ahead with an ‘undemocratic’ law that was ‘weak’, with ‘many grey areas’.
One of those to vote in favour of the ban was Nationalist Richard Lyle, who only minutes before appeared to hold back tears as he raised concerns over the move.
The Uddingston and Bellshill MSP said he was worried that good parents could end up criminalised for merely tapping a child on the hand or backside – and called for clear guidance to avoid unnecessary prosecutions.
Mr Lyle said: ‘The effects of a police investigation, court appearances, prosecutions on families in these scenarios would be highly disproportionate, especially for the children involved.
‘Criminalisation should be reserved for adults who have acted to harm a child, not for parents who are simply ill-informed.
‘Good guidance by the Lord Advocate will avoid the scenario which has often been talked about, about a parent who taps a child on the hand or the backside ends up with a criminal record.’
He also raised concerns over a ‘disparity in enforcement’.
The Scottish Conservatives voted against the smacking ban, saying the legislation contains ‘legal loopholes’ which could see parents criminalised for threatening to hit or raising their voice to their children.
This is because it does not specifically mention outlawing ‘physical’ punishment.
Tory Gordon Lindhurst claimed that the process of passing the Bill had been ‘undemocratic’ and that it had ‘not been transparent’.
This follows the attempt of his colleagues Adam Tomkins and Oliver Mundell to close a loophole over the ‘physical’ punishment of children. They put forward amendments – but had these rejected.
Yesterday, Mr Mundell said: ‘We are being asked to pass into law primary legislation that is imprecise and suboptimal, legislation which misdirects resources and our focus, legislation that could unnecessarily criminalise good parents and draw others needlessly into contact with the criminal justice system.’
Mr Mundell said he was ‘disappointed not have been able to secure any changes to the Bill’, but warned the Scottish Government that it is likely the legislation will be ‘challenged in the future’.
He added: ‘This could have been avoided with better scrutiny but, as I have seen with the Named Persons legislation, there are too many colleagues who are happy to accept poor quality legislation as long as they support its purpose.’
Mr Finnie’s Bill will become law after receiving royal assent.
He said: ‘I am absolutely delighted that the Scottish parliament has taken this historic and courageous step.
‘The leadership shown by MSPs will send a strong message that violence is never acceptable in any setting, and that our children deserve at least the same legal protections that adults enjoy.’ Last night, Miss Todd said: ‘I’m very pleased that parliament has now voted to ensure that children, without exception, have the same protection from assault as adults.’ The Law Society called for a public consultation on the legislation – warning that it will take more than a law change to alter the behaviour of parents.
Morag Driscoll, the Law Society’s Family Law Committee convener, said the move sends ‘a clear message all forms of assault on children are unacceptable’.
But she added: ‘Driving meaningful behavioural change requires much more than changing the law. The Scottish Government now needs to launch a comprehensive public education and awareness campaign to alert people to these changes.’
Comment – Page 16