" You don't hit people if you want them to follow you.".
In 1997 a fourteen year old boy's step-father was cleared by the British courts for causing the boy actual bodily harm and claimed that hitting him with a three foot garden cane was reasonable chastisement. Many people think that, that kind of extreme punishment should not be legal. To add to this point a large number of child psychiatrists, health professionals, educationalists and childminders are against smacking because there is absolutely no evidence to show that it works and the majority of people are worried that many parents will not know the difference between physical abuse and smacking.
Some individuals believe that continual smacking does not work and that the message may come across to the child that they should not get caught next time. They think that explaining to the child why they were wrong would work a lot better. However, the U.K government remains firm that parents should be allowed to hit their children.
On the other hand of the argument, the majority of people in the U.K believe smacking is a useful method of teaching a child right from wrong. Evidence for this is shown in a recent survey where seven out of ten parents in the U.K think that it is acceptable to smack their children. Furthermore, it is believed by a large number in society that children would take advantage of a ban if it were to come to pass, by accusing people close to them of alleged assaults.
Many adults over forty think that the evidence that smacking works is staring us in the face. They believe that the disrespect and overconfidence in today's younger generations is a result of smacking becoming illegal in schools. In their experience, when they were young there was less cheek and arrogance then today.
An anonymous individual has a completely different view on the subject. He believes that a smack does not depend on physical force.