Sample Essay: Don’t ban smacking (See p. 41)
Recently, Dr Chaney, head of Australia’s paediatric body, called for a ban preventing parents from smacking their own children. At the moment, smacking is currently legal provided that it is reasonable. A recent survey suggests that parents wish to retain what should be a parent’s right to choose the best method of discipline for their child. After all they must set boundaries, especially in situations of danger. Above all, it is up to parents to set the rules and ensure that children are respectful, thoughtful and decent.
Firstly, parents have legal authority and responsibility in raising their children, so they should be able to have the freedom to choose their disciplinary tools, without interference. As long as the form of disciplinary action is justified and does not leave any permanent harm both physically or emotionally then a light smack is acceptable. After all, most parents have their child’s best interests at heart. For example, David Kern noticed a welcome change in his daughter’s behaviour after smacking or the “threat of smacking”. In situations where it was difficult to reason with her, a smack made the difference. Obviously much depends upon the circumstance and factors such as their age, reasoning capacity and the nature of the offence itself.
Secondly, smacking is an effective form of discipline and helps parents set firm boundaries, without which which children are likely to become spoiled. Often, children lack the ability to reason at such an early age, especially in situations of danger. Dr Michael Carr Gregg, leading child psychologist agrees that “we should (not) be criminalising people, in situations where children run across the road they give them a tap on the backside’’. However, smacking should only remain as a last resort option. For example, it can be used to reinforce situations of danger or clearly unacceptable behaviour when other forms of discipline are not working.
Clearly, any law attempting to ban smacking would simply be unenforceable. There would be unecessary costs associated with the ban and very little benefits. For the slightest of taps, child protection agencies will have to intervene to assess the conditions. Trials will then have to be held to persecute every parent for every one of these so-called ‘“crimes’’. Often, punishment becomes very subjective, and police will need to rely on people’s different opinions. In the end, it is generally the child’s word against their parents. Ultimately, we cannot know for sure whether the parent is actually wrong or whether the child is exaggerating and passing off a light tap as a massive assault.
Opponents state that parents must set an example to children and show them that violence is not an effective way to solve conflict. After all, they say, we would be charged if we assaulted a stranger. However, children are not strangers but form part of our most treasured relationships. As long as parents retain control, they often need to smack a child, especially if that child’s life is in danger or if they are becoming spoilt and unruly. A recent lifestyle survey revealed that 50 to 60% of teenagers have their own way at home and in fact dictate life leaving parents helpless and powerless. It all starts in childhood!
Overall, it is the parent who must raise their child, not the state. So why condemn them for trying to transform their children into respectable and well disciplined adults? Parents wish to retain the right to smack their children for good reason – sometimes it is absolutely necessary. A careful tap sets necessary boundaries, leads to positive behavioural change and protects children from danger. Such a loving tap can make all the difference in a child’s life.
Continue your Better Essays Learning Journey
- Please purchase Better Essays and Persuasive Techniques in order to access the Free Online Study Exercise Program: Buy Now: $24.95
- Return to the Better Essays Home Page