Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

When Mr. Bumble (in Charles Dickens' ''Oliver Twist'') stated "If the law supposes that sir, the law is a ass" the law was nowhere near as much of "a ass" as it is today.

Alas we now have a situation designed allegedly to protect children from abuse, but which I fear will in fact do no such thing. Children are being given "protection" from and recourse to legal action against their own parents should those parents have cause to administer the mildest smack. The parents who thus lovingly admonish their children, and I do emphasise the lovingly, will now be criminalised.

I venture to suggest that this will not deter situations of actual abuse where a child is too terrified of the adult concerned to even consider reporting such abuse for fear of further "punishment". It will however affect the normal loving household where a child in a bit of a strop, having been chastised by a parent, will decide to "tell the police over you" and the situation will snowball far beyond what the child ever intended in the heat of the moment, or in fact ever contemplated. (How many children fully understand the consequences of their actions?) The parents could end up facing a prison sentence, thus depriving the child of the loving home environment whilst those whom this idiotic move claims to be protecting will continue to be abused and live in fear.

I quote this mornings "Comment" in the Daily Mail
"This has nothing to do with the genuine issues of child cruelty and abuse, which are shamefully prevalent in our society. The loathsome adults who mistreat children deserve every penalty of the law. But there is a huge difference between such savagery and the responsible discipline born of affection and concern"

Amen to that. I couldn't have put it better myself.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

When did we vote to allow the NSPCC the right to promote legislation in Parliament? I must have been out of the country that day.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Have we got any laws to protect the parents when a child hits them and they can no longer do anything to protect themselves? Some teenagers are very strong, I know I've come across them in schools. Does the abused parent now have to simply sit back and take it for fear of being prosecuted?

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Laws such as this do not stop abuse. I was only smacked once by my dad as a child, once was enough, the threat of another smack made me behave. I consider that this smack did me no harm. There are too many do- gooders in this country who are unable to see the wood for the trees. If you pop down to Accy social services on any day of the week there will be a case conference about a child protection issue. Unfortunately these families who abuse their kids are never infertile, so I have attended plenty of these. The abuse isn't always physical, sometimes it is a matter of neglect ie, children coming a cropper when left home alone - toddlers especially. Sometimes the abuse is emotional or sexual but there's plenty of genuine abuse going on. Maybe the law should be looking at ways to stop these sick individuals interfering with their kids before it picks on those who deal out a well timed and well deserved, one-off smack.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

The papers today are full of quotes from those that agree with the latest legislation and I notice that they use the word "hit" rather than "smack" to emphasise their point of view.

One person who was AGAINST the legislation was our own Greg Pope. He was amonst the rebels that felt that the government hadn't gone far enough and that parents should be fined/inprisoned for the gentlest of taps on their offspring.

He reckons that he has never in his life smacked his three children......but I wonder how much time and involvement he had with them when they were young, or did he leave that sort of thing to his wife?

(This is quite remenisent of a previous post;) )

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

I agree with Lettie that this law will not stop abuse. Those children whose parents actually hit them will be too afraid of being hit again to report to anyone. The only parents who will suffer (and consequently their children) will be the ordinary caring loving parents.

A lot of abuse is invisible too, such as emotional abuse which can leave far more permanent damage but no evidence.

Oddly enough we were in a butty shop today and whilst waiting for our turn I noticed a "Daily Star" which had a totally different report saying that the government had been defeated.

One thing I do find interesting is that Tony "I admit I smacked my older children when they were small" Blaire did not participate in the vote.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

My blood was boiling yesterday when this subject came on the news. In my opinion its the Nanny State going way too far.
I am 25 and look at some teenagers and just think that what they need is a smacked bottom. And that if their parents had given them that when they were little, they might not be such louts today.
I do NOT want my one year old turning out like that. And if I have to smack his bottom as a last resort once in a while its a small price to pay in my eyes. I rather a few tears from him over a smacked bottom when he was younger, than complaints about his behaviour in years to come and me wondering where it all went wrong.


I would just like to add that obviously I am not smacking my little lad NOW - he's only one. I'm just making the point that if its needed in the future myself and my partner fully reserve the right to smack.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

I think I now understand this apparent discrepancy in the reports which I read and the one Gobsmacked commented on.

ALL smacking is not banned, only something which results in a "mark" of any kind which on the surface of it is the distinction we were trying to make previously between a smack and a hit, where the former is a non-violent quickly administered admonishment and the latter is violent and harmful.

Some had wanted ALL to be banned, including the lightest tap, which would have been ludicrous because that could have got completely out of hand if a child took a parent to court for even placing a hand on their shoulder. Don't laugh because that has happened to teachers who have tried to hold a child back from pushing past others in a corridor for example and been accused of physical abuse. That part was defeated. What we are left with is a distinction between something which doesn't leave a mark and something which does.

The problem seems to be how to define "mark". As somebody said in my paper, some children's skin reacts more than others so that briefly a redness may appear even though the cause was not as severe as something suffered by another child whose skin shows no reaction. Also how do you later prove whether a mark was or wasn't there? Surely only something like bruising should be recorded as a mark?

I'd like to hope that common sense will prevail here and that it will mean that only those who physically harm their children to the point of bruising will be the ones who are punished. I can't help but think that it opens a way for children who are peeved at their parents to report something to the police as a gross exaggeration, and by the time they regret their actions the ball will already have started rolling and there'll be nothing they can do about it.

What about the neglected child who has suffered from a lack of discipline to the point of not knowing right from wrong. Isn't that also child abuse? You can't see it the same but you can certainly see the effects.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

It makes me wonder what sort of upbringing these so-called politicians had that makes them get their knickers in such a twist over such a small thing as a disciplined smack. I mean I used to get some right cracks across the back of my legs from my mum that hurt like hell when I was really bad, but I laugh about them now. Smacks like that left some great patterns on my legs.

I can only think that they a) didn't get smacked enough as a child, or b) they got smacked TOO much and it caused permanant brain damage.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Maybe it has very little to do with the politicians up-bringing, and more to do with politics! The R.S.P.C.A is a huge charity and is one of the wealthiest in the country. I wonder what percentage of their income is spent on influencing political decisions instead of dealing directly with cruelty to children? I can understand them wanting a safer environment for minors and of course, should put pressure on M.P's but they, like the hunting fraternity seem to have far more "clout" than most other organisations:(

Saying that, I like your analysis (below) of politicians:D
:hitting8:

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Well, the RSPCA is certainly getting too big for it's boots if it is trying to promote childrens rights now, as well as those of animals.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

:oops: I remembered........................but then I forgot.:wub:

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

No child that is actually being abused (physically or otherwise) is going to speak up against their parents, as many people have already pointed out. Adults must speak up for them. I've read a few true stories were unfortunately the violence has been taken too far and a child has been killed. But what is almost as shocking, is when the neighbour testifies in court to say they often hear loud noises and then the child excessively screaming - if that was the case why didn't they tell the authorities? I couldn't imagine the guilt I would feel if I thought a child was being abused and I didn't do anything to try to stop it - even at risk of being proven wrong (which would be the better result anyway).

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

I agree with you there. It's far better to risk being wrong than to risk a child's safety and life.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

The biggest problem society faces regarding child abuse is that there ARE and always have been, (and will be) parents that go "over the top" and physically abuse their children to the point of permanent damage or even death. This will not go away with legislation.

In a few cases, I have winessed in the streets or supermarket, the (usually) mother is put under tremendous pressure by a whining/crying/demanding child and then hits out indiscriminately to the nearest part of the childs body that is available to be hit. Of course this is totally wrong but I can sympathise with her because a 24 hour bombardment of screaming, 365 days of the year must put tremendous pressure on a mum with troublesome children. For those dads out there that either "sleep" or "work" and come home demanding their dinner, and then go down the pub, open your eyes to the pressures of being a mum! This is something I used to be guilty of, but with age, my eyes have been opened and I realise now that the wife with a young family is under pressure far more than a career minded dad!

And there is macho "Dad!" Remember the expression, "wait 'til your father gets home?" He comes home from a "hard day" at work and is hit by a list of misdemeanors that his offspring has done during the day and is expected to give out "instant justice?" He hasn't given a thought to his family in the past 9 hours but is suddenly expectly to weigh up the right and wrongs and come up (under pressure) with a solution. He hits!!!

All this is inherited from decades ago when it was expected to punish a child in the worst possible way to stop the child from repeating the "crime"

I think all will agree that this is all wrong, but surely education is the answer, not the drastic step of denying parents the rights of a slap on the wrist to an 18 month old that is about to touch an electric fire? or the "bobby" that "drags" a lad to his house to explain that their son had been riding his bike on the road at night with no lights? The teacher that has to back down in front of the entire class by a defiant pupil?

As adults, we are leaving ourselves open to the abuse of minors and what is worse is that they know it and are taking full advantage of the system. Instead of the parents being educated in controlling their children, the children are learning how to control adults!:confused:

There is no easy answer, but by bringing in laws to totally banish punishment of children, we are making a recipe for disaster for our children and childrens children....

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Learning?
My partner has an eight year old from a previous relationship whom he sees once a week. This child is the most manipulative little sod you will ever meet - takes after his mother. He will whine, lay the guilt trip on about being from a broken home, scream and kick if he doesn't get his own way. He has learned that this doesn't get him anywhere in our house, but it does get him results at his mothers. So to get results at our house when he couldn't get something he wanted, he accused me of hitting him about 2 years ago. The trouble he caused with that was unreal. It caused tremendous stress for myself and my partner as he didn't know what to do - the brat was really really laying it on thick(although he didn't have a mark on him), and I was obviously furious at the little horror telling such fibs like that. To make it worse its mother was instantly ready to go to Social Services (until she realised that then she would have to admit that she DID know who the father was and would lose benefit).
Even now to this day, I refuse point blank to be left alone with the child. He has admitted since that he was fibbing (he's never apologised but blamed it on me for not giving him sweets), but I make my partner be present whenever the child is in the house. Its a shame really, but I am not prepared to take that risk again.
The thing is I am not the only person that I know that has gone through that. Kids these days know already that if they threaten to accuse of abuse and suchlike they will get their own way 99% of the time. This law will only serve to make it worse.

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

You have my sympathy in such an appalling situation Pixie. I hate to say this but that child needs a good hiding from his mother but no doubt is extrememly unlikely to receive it.

My apologies to Willow if my original posting was open to misinterpretation. It is indeed still acceptable to administer a "love tap" which leaves no mark. The problem lies with exactly how that is to be interpreted or indeed ven proved (as you will no doubt verify Pixie, from your own situation).

As I have said previously, and still maintain, the only children I have come across who have never been smacked have turned into manipulative vandalising hooligans who "know their rights".

Re: Come back Mr Bumble, all is forgiven.
 

Lots of sensible statements regarding a "Political" issue, designed with stupidity in mind and throwing common sense to the wind.

Next they will be prohibiting "Punishment for Crimes" as it demeans the individual and is against human rights (it will also save money as we won't need jails or reform institutions).

Whatever any of us may say or do....it's too late!!

Radical changes are needed to our politicians and the political system...(we might as well bring back hanging and apply it to the do-gooders!!