Ban on smacking ‘will help protect children’

AN ARROW majority of people in Wales believe ending the physical punishment of children will protect their rights, according to a public consultation published today.

The Welsh Government plans to end such punishment in Wales and the consultation’s responses found just over half (50.3%) agreed and 48.1% disagreed with the statement that the proposal would achieve the aim of protecting children’s rights; 1.5% said they “don’t know”.

There were 1,890 responses to the consultation, which ran from January to April this year. At the same time some fear a proposed change in the law will criminalise parents.

There is also a lack of agreement on what corporal punishment actually is, whether it includes smacking a child with a hand or using objects to strike them.

The Welsh Government says the findings will now be used to help inform planned changes to the law. Responses came mainly from individuals and organisations and a small number came from outside Wales.

The First Minister has announced the Welsh Government will introduce a Bill to remove the defence of reasonable punishment in year three of the legislative programme (between September 2018 and July 2019).

Objectors said the plans would criminalise parents and remove their rights to choose how to raise their children, while those in support said children deserved the same protection as adults for what amounts to assault.

“Children should not be subjected

to violence in any circumstance. They have a right to live free from fear of violence and from actual violence”, wrote one respondent.

Another said: “A smack on the back of the legs or bum is not corporal punishment. Hitting a child with a cane/ belt/hard object is. There is a clear distinction between beating a child and a small smack.”

The 44-page report said a “significant number of comments” highlighted the right of children to be taught about boundaries through measured and reasonable physical punishment.

Some said children had a right to effective discipline, which they believed included “reasonable physical punishment”.

Others feared a change in the law would put more pressure on overstretched police, health and social services.

Comments submitted included: “Children have a right to learn boundaries and discipline - for their own good - reasonable physical discipline is a valid and time-tested means of doing this by loving parents.”

Another said: “Surely our children have a right to be guided? ...This proposal has the potential to set child against parent and neighbour against neighbour, resulting in a further fragmentation of our already fragmented society.”

The document adds: “Respondents noted that implementing the proposal would serve to stigmatise and criminalise parents, including “law abiding and caring parents” who use “moderate and reasonable” methods to discipline their children”.

Another is quoted as saying:”Your proposal will have the effect of treating ordinary loving parents like real abusers and cause unnecessary anxiety for their children who will be required to give evidence against their own father and/or mother.”

Respondents frequently noted that the proposal was excessive and disproportionate, punishing those parents who were employing what were deemed by many to be responsible and measured approaches to teaching discipline to their children.

“This proposal is simply going to criminalise responsible parents who smack their children on the hand or backside to correct bad behaviour, when it causes them no long-term harm,” one respondent wrote.

Another feared: “This proposal is very concerning as it is calling for an unprecedented level of state intervention in family life. Ultimately, this proposal suggests that the government is best placed to determine how a child should be parented”.

Not all agreed on what corporal punishment was. Some said it was any form of physical punishment, others that it involved striking a child on specific parts of their body.

“The use of a cane, belt, ruler or shoe was deemed to constitute physical punishment for many respondents,” the report added.

Most frequently raised objections to a change in the law included that rather than protecting children’s rights, the proposal would have an adverse effect on children by undermining their rights to learn boundaries and discipline. Objectors said the proposal would have an adverse effect on parents, guardians and existing legislation adequately protects children’s rights.

Minister for Children, Older People and Social Care, Huw Irranca-Davies, said: “While the primary responsibility for raising children lies with parents, the Welsh Government has a very specific role in creating a society in which children can grow up in a safe and nurturing environment.

“Our commitment to introduce legislation, alongside support for parents, is key to us achieving success in this endeavour.”

An NSPCC Cymru spokesperson said: “The NSPCC has long campaigned for children in Wales to have the same protection against assault as adults.

“We believe this change is a common-sense move which is about fairness and equality for children.

“It is wrong that a legal defence which does not exist in a case of assault against an adult can be used to justify striking a child.”