Policy Suggestion: Reintroduce Smacking to Some Schools

Anthony Butcher · 23-09-2004, 12:32 AM

Firstly, I think that smacking is a sign of failure; it means that relations with a child have broken down to the extent that verbal reasoning won't work. It should always be a last resort, when all else has failed.

However, if we ban smacking by parents, we take away that last resort. Suddenly there is no ultimate punishment that parents can use to control their children. We have seen the effect of this in schools; the ban on smacking and caning has made behaviour much worse in many schools. It leaves teachers very vulnerable and allows badly behaved children to run riot in classrooms, sucking up the attention of teachers. This in turn damages the education of the better bahaved children.

The problem is that we have to balance the rights of a child with the needs of a child, and the rights of the other children in a classroom. While a ban on smacking improves the human rights of an individual child it simultaneously damages their need to learn control and discipline, and counters the right of other children not to have their school time disrupted. Children sometimes cannot see the dangers that they place themselves and others in, or the disruption/damage/offence that they are causing. Reasoning with a four year old about putting fingers in an electrical socket, rather than smacking the hand, potentially risks that child's life unnecessarily.

There is also the issue that we are turning our population INTO phpbb_a bunch of pathetic drips, scared of a little pain. A smack, caning or slippering hurts for a little while, and then the pain goes. Big deal. There is a huge difference between receiving a smack and being abused or beaten up. If a smack helps to improve a child's behaviour and safety in the long term, then I think that this is a worthwhile price.

As I mentioned, the lack of ultimate punishment in schools means that head teachers are left with exclusion as the sole final "punishment" for disruptive behaviour. A day off school is hardly either a punishment or a constructive way to help a child who is falling behind. The lack of corporal punishment also means that teachers have to waste valuable time asking pupils to be quiet time and again. Parents have their time wasted arranging child care for excluded children. Worst of all, the children simply don't care a great deal about being excluded, so it doesn't act as much of a deterrent to further bad behaviour.

Giving a child a smack, slipper or cane on the other hand is a punishment that no child wants (so it works as a deterrent) and is over very quickly, enabling the child to continue in school. The threat of a smack gives teachers a real control over the behaviour of children. This takes up far less time for the staff and the parents, improves the general class behaviour and improves the attendence time for unruly children.

On top of retaining the right of parents to smack their children, we should allow some schools to reintroduce smacking, slippering and the cane, thus giving parents the choice about whether they want their children to be smacked or not. Schools with corporal punishment would get significantly improved academic results, and the children would be better behaved and happier at school.

mkpdavies · 03-10-2004, 09:17 PM

I agree that parents should be allowed to smack their children, with obvious limits that mean abuse isn't allowed.

On the school side of things I am not so sure. I certainly feel sorry for teachers these days, but I know I wouldn't be happy for my child to be hit by another adult. My father told me some shocking stories of how vindictive a minority of his teachers could be.

I personaly, would prefer that a teacher had much better support in ejecting problem pupils from classes, and if necessary from school. The parents should be given a warning and if they can't install the discipline, then the school has the right to exclude without fear of reprisal from the local authorities.

Maybe a compromise is a school can request the right from a parent to punnish a child within reason at the start the the childs schooling. Those that don't want to sign don't have to, but accept the schools decesion if they then want to expell the child.

Anthony Butcher · 04-10-2004, 07:02 AM

Perhaps I wasn't very clear. I wasn't really endorsing individual teachers having the right to smack children. The aim is to allow head teachers to use physical punishments as deemed necessary.

Also, this should only be available in some schools, for parents who would rather have this kind of punishment. There are plenty of parents who are against smacking of any kind, and this also needs to be catered for.

It would be interesting to see which schools had the better track records.

23-09-2004, 12:32 AM	#1 (permalink)
Anthony Butcher Administrator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Long Ashton, Bristol Posts: 9,538 Party: None	Policy Suggestion: Reintroduce Smacking to Some Schools Firstly, I think that smacking is a sign of failure; it means that relations with a child have broken down to the extent that verbal reasoning won't work. It should always be a last resort, when all else has failed. However, if we ban smacking by parents, we take away that last resort. Suddenly there is no ultimate punishment that parents can use to control their children. We have seen the effect of this in schools; the ban on smacking and caning has made behaviour much worse in many schools. It leaves teachers very vulnerable and allows badly behaved children to run riot in classrooms, sucking up the attention of teachers. This in turn damages the education of the better bahaved children. The problem is that we have to balance the rights of a child with the needs of a child, and the rights of the other children in a classroom. While a ban on smacking improves the human rights of an individual child it simultaneously damages their need to learn control and discipline, and counters the right of other children not to have their school time disrupted. Children sometimes cannot see the dangers that they place themselves and others in, or the disruption/damage/offence that they are causing. Reasoning with a four year old about putting fingers in an electrical socket, rather than smacking the hand, potentially risks that child's life unnecessarily. There is also the issue that we are turning our population INTO phpbb_a bunch of pathetic drips, scared of a little pain. A smack, caning or slippering hurts for a little while, and then the pain goes. Big deal. There is a huge difference between receiving a smack and being abused or beaten up. If a smack helps to improve a child's behaviour and safety in the long term, then I think that this is a worthwhile price. As I mentioned, the lack of ultimate punishment in schools means that head teachers are left with exclusion as the sole final "punishment" for disruptive behaviour. A day off school is hardly either a punishment or a constructive way to help a child who is falling behind. The lack of corporal punishment also means that teachers have to waste valuable time asking pupils to be quiet time and again. Parents have their time wasted arranging child care for excluded children. Worst of all, the children simply don't care a great deal about being excluded, so it doesn't act as much of a deterrent to further bad behaviour. Giving a child a smack, slipper or cane on the other hand is a punishment that no child wants (so it works as a deterrent) and is over very quickly, enabling the child to continue in school. The threat of a smack gives teachers a real control over the behaviour of children. This takes up far less time for the staff and the parents, improves the general class behaviour and improves the attendence time for unruly children. On top of retaining the right of parents to smack their children, we should allow some schools to reintroduce smacking, slippering and the cane, thus giving parents the choice about whether they want their children to be smacked or not. Schools with corporal punishment would get significantly improved academic results, and the children would be better behaved and happier at school.

03-10-2004, 09:17 PM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,615	I agree that parents should be allowed to smack their children, with obvious limits that mean abuse isn't allowed. On the school side of things I am not so sure. I certainly feel sorry for teachers these days, but I know I wouldn't be happy for my child to be hit by another adult. My father told me some shocking stories of how vindictive a minority of his teachers could be. I personaly, would prefer that a teacher had much better support in ejecting problem pupils from classes, and if necessary from school. The parents should be given a warning and if they can't install the discipline, then the school has the right to exclude without fear of reprisal from the local authorities. Maybe a compromise is a school can request the right from a parent to punnish a child within reason at the start the the childs schooling. Those that don't want to sign don't have to, but accept the schools decesion if they then want to expell the child. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-10-2004, 07:02 AM	#3 (permalink)
Anthony Butcher Administrator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Long Ashton, Bristol Posts: 9,538 Party: None	Perhaps I wasn't very clear. I wasn't really endorsing individual teachers having the right to smack children. The aim is to allow head teachers to use physical punishments as deemed necessary. Also, this should only be available in some schools, for parents who would rather have this kind of punishment. There are plenty of parents who are against smacking of any kind, and this also needs to be catered for. It would be interesting to see which schools had the better track records.