Consultation on the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill
|
Tystiolaeth i’r Pwyllgor Plant, Pobl Ifanc ac Addysg ar gyfer craffu Cyfnod 1 Bil Plant (Diddymu Amddiffyniad Cosb Resymol) (Cymru) |
Evidence submitted to the Children, Young People and Education Committee for Stage 1 scrutiny of the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill |
|
CADRP-52 |
CADRP-52 |
About you
Individual
— No
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
1. This bill would criminalise loving parents who use wisdom and the knowledge of their own children in chastising them suitably, as upheld by the European Court of Human Rights. A mild smack is not abuse, any more than a doctor giving an immunisation is not an assault.
2. There is no evidence that mild and consistent physical chastisement causes damage to a child. (The Government admitted this in its consultation document last year.) On the contrary, for many generations, it has helped to produce well balanced, law abiding members of society. That is one of the reasons why there is major opposition from the public.
3. The Government expects it to cost £3.3 million for law enforcement, and has no idea of the costs for child protection services. Requiring police and social workers to investigate parents who smack is draining money and resources away from the already difficult task of identifying abuse.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
No.
• The law already protects children who are really at risk of harm.
• Any punishment that is excessive is already against the law.
• The current law does not need to be changed, it needs to be enforced; there are not enough resources to adequately protect children in abusive family settings.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
1. cost,
2. policing would be nigh on impossible, and take resources away from where needed
3. children will be traumatised to have their parents investigated and their family lives intruded into.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
no
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
• Removing the ‘reasonable chastisement defence’ will mean that a parent disciplining their child with a mild smack would be classed as assault. Banning smacking will inevitably catch ordinary loving parents and turn them into criminals.
• Enforcement would disrupt families. If a parent is penalised for smacking they could lose their job or even custody of their children. The potential trauma to any children in this scenario is unthinkable, and totally avoidable.
• The NHS has already said reports of smacking will be dealt with in the same way as abuse if reasonable chastisement is outlawed. Staff and patients who are parents could be labelled abusers.
• Turning smacking into abuse will bring confusion into the law against child abuse. This will endanger children who are truly at-risk.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
It is a totally avoidable expense. There is no need to waste money on this Bill.
The opportunity cost means that other areas will lose out, to bring in legislation which really will harm children more than help them.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
Family life needs protecting, not further undermining.