Scotland Bans Smacking

EarthRod

It’s all very well to say let’s ban it, but the consequences, if reported are now quite catastrophic. Social Services and Police will become involved and what will be the punishment? At worst the child’s parents could be jailed or the children removed..
How does that help? In fact it’s the worst of all situations.

( and to be clear I an not talking about abuse here)

doug56hl

What is a smack?

...Legally speaking.

doug56hl

Any and all forms of physical violence against a child i.e assault. Previously there was the defence of  'justifiable assault' or 'reasonable chastisement' when violence was used against children

While Scots law protects adults from all forms of physical violence, the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 provides a defence of justifiable assault of a child, which can be exercised where it’s claimed a violent act against a child was physical punishment carried out in exercise of a parental right.

Scotland has now removed justifiable assault or reasonable chastisement as a defence and gives children the same rights as adults as regards assault.
The Policy Memorandum uses the definition of physical punishment, sometimes referred to as corporal punishment, used by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. It includes hitting, such as smacking, slapping and smacking with a hand or an implement. It can also involve kicking, shaking or throwing children, scratching, pinching, biting, pulling hair or boxing ears, forcing children to stay in uncomfortable positions, burning, scalding or forced ingestion.

Under common law, an attack on one person by another is an assault, whether the person attacked is a child or an adult.

However, some cases of assault against children can currently be justified in Scotland. A person charged with assault of a child can claim the defence of 'reasonable chastisement' or 'justifiable assault' when they have used physical force to discipline a child.

The Bill aims to provide children with the same protection from assault as adults, by abolishing the defence of reasonable chastisement. It does not create a new criminal offence.
Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill

EarthRod

Why are the consequences quite catastrophic?
A first offence would likely be treated with a meeting with social services and warning of what would happen if continued offences took place. Subsequent offences by police caution or a fine. Prison would be the final stage of a long process where a parent wilfully continues to assault the child despite all warnings. And for that to happen it wouldn't be the one smack but a history of continued and long term physical punishment.

The changes in Scotland will not be retrospective. There will be a 12 month period after the bill has achieved royal assent where it will not be implemented. This will allow time for parents to be made aware of the changes. The aim is to change parents behaviour not necessarily to prosecute people.

Section 2 of the Bill would place a duty on Scottish Ministers to promote public awareness and understanding of the effect of Section 1 of the Bill. It will be for Scottish Ministers to decide how to implement this provision. The Explanatory Notes to the Bill suggest it might include a publicity campaign, aimed at parents and carers, promoting a move to non-physical methods of child discipline. In addition, it is suggested that children and young people are also made aware of their rights.
Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill

But if parents continue to use physical punishment the option is obviously there for the punishment of parents using the applicable parts of existing laws on assault against adults. There will be no new criminal offence created. All the law is doing is removing a legal defence which is not there for assault against adults.

MrFraggle

Is there enough cotton wool to go round? Maybe bubble wrap is the modern alternative.

I could feel sorry for the children, but luckily there is the playground and streets to help them face reality and learn how to defend (mentally and physically) and handle 'abuse' and 'assault' as they grow up.

doug56hl

Scotland bans smacking but you can continue to  cause untold damage to your kids by smoking and excessive drinking and maybe allowing them to have a sip, after all what harm can it do?

EarthRod

You appear to subscribe to the school of hard knocks and learning the hard way that might is right.

Correct me if I am wrong but are you really saying that you feel sorry for the children who will no longer have the chance to suffer from physical punishment by their parents but luckily they will have the opportunity to be bullied in school or otherwise assaulted by their peers?

How do you stand on beating donkeys? In favour? or against?
How do you stand on beating wives? In favour? or against?
If against them, why be against not beating children?

All the law does is to give children the same right not to be assaulted that adults have.

Virtually everyone I knew in the immigrant, working-class community I grew up in was smacked. Did we become violent maniacs? Of course not. In fact, we came to a clear understanding of how one should behave. We learned self-control and respect.
Parents must have the right to smack their kids
From the same Brendon O' Neill who last week on TV said there should be rioting over Brexit. A lot of self control and respect for other's property and lives on evidence there....

doug56hl

I think you need to curtail your hyperbole.

EarthRod

What hyperbole.
That action and the others I mentioned is based on the same grounding of being able to do to your 'property' as you wish and use physical punishment to enforce that. Some countries and cultures allow beating of donkeys, wives and children. Other countries and cultures have banned the first two but not the last. Others have gone the entire way and banned all.

doug56hl

Property?

I think you need to curtail your hyperbole.