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-191

CADRP-191

 

About you

Individual

1      The Bill’s general principles

1.1     Do you support the principles of the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill?

— No

1.2     Please outline your reasons for your answer to question 1.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

Parents are responsible for their children not the State.

The law already protects from abuse.

A mild smack is not abuse but a deterant.

Undisaplined children are bad for society and bad for children.

The bible makes it clear that rebellion is removed by smacking. Beating is wrong and done in wrath. A controlled smack is the correct thing to do.

It creates boundary lines that makes children feel.secure.

Sweden has had a significant increase in abuse towards other children since the smacking ban. The evidence is clear that remove smacking will make children less safe.

It could criminalise loving parents.

Authorities don't have time or the resources to deal with claims against loving parents. They struggle to deal with crime at present. Most of which is not getting dealt with.

Nearly all conversations I have individuals feel there needs to be smacking in place, and the liberal attitudes that have pervaded our society on it have led to an increase in respect of children towards adults, each other and an increase in crime.

We will reap the whirlwind if this measure is undertaken.

This going against the views of the majority who the assembly represent. Another example of how undemocratic our elected members have become. We no longer live in a democracy, but are heading towards a socialist state.

1.3     Do you think there is a need for legislation to deliver what this Bill is trying to achieve?

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

he existing law covers protection of child abuse. No need to change it.

2      The Bill’s implementation

2.1     Do you have any comments about any potential barriers to  implementing the Bill? If no, go to question 3.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

the bill should not go through.

2.2     Do you think the Bill takes account of these potential barriers?

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

I think the bill will come into effect regardless of the overwhelming majority being against it.

3      Unintended consequences

3.1     Do you think there are there any unintended consequences arising from the Bill? If no, go to question 4.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

Yes it will criminalise loving parents and lead to further erozing off our society.

4      Financial implications

4.1     Do you have any comments on the financial implications of the Bill (as set out in Part 2 of the Explanatory Memorandum)? If no, go to question 5.1

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

We need money for lots of things. This a total waste and lunacy.

5      Other considerations

5.1     Do you have any other points you wish to raise about this Bill?

(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)

-