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-222

CADRP-222

 

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)

I am a parent of 3 wonder teenage children.  They all do exceptionally well in school and always get glowing feedback from their teachers.  I love my children dearly and raised them thoughtfully, and respectfully.  Since they were babies, we emphasized their dignity and respected them as people.  We used smacking as a form of discipline.  In truth, we probably had cause to smacked each of them only about 4 times in their lives.  But that was sufficient to establish the realization that there are consequences to bad behavior.  It is dishonest to confuse loving discipline and correction with child abuse.  It will be a travesty to criminalize loving parents like myself for doing what I think is best for my child.  I have never, and will never, abuse my child.  Teachers and other independent observers will testify to the wonderful relationship I have with my children, but also to the maturity and confidence of my children.  I repeat: it will be a tragedy to criminalize people like myself for raising 3 wonderful human beings to the best of my ability - and in my opinion, with demonstrable good outcomes.

From experience of my own childhood, and from raising three children, (and comparing parenting methods from other parents) smacking is probably the least humiliating and psychologically damaging forms of discipline.  Much less than non-physical, but emotional, forms of discipline.  My children always responded very positively to being disciplined. 

Government should not overreach itself to interfere at such a personal level in the lives of families.  It cannot use criminal law to prescribe parenting methods.  Current laws do not prevent child abuse by bad parents.  Criminalising loving parents will not help to prevent child abuse by bad parents. Please: it is dishonest to confuse smacking with child abuse - there is a huge difference.

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)

No.  There are laws in place already against child abuse.  Yet, child abuse still happens.  A law that criminalizes loving parent will simply punish loving parents (and their children), while doing nothing in addition to stop bad parents who are currently abusing their children. 

Smacking is not child abuse - there is a big difference and any loving parent knows it.  Do not criminalize good parents in an attempt to stop child abuse by bad parents.

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)

Criminalizing smacking can overwhelm police and social workers with trivial reports, leaving less time to investigate and prevent cases of serious child abuse.  Smacking should not be confused with child abuse.  There are horrendous cases of child abuse happening daily, and distracting police and social from the high workload of serious cases will do more harm than good to currently vulnerable children. 

Social services are already stretched and finding foster care for vulnerable children is challenging.  Children should not be removed from loving families, while vulnerable children are missed.  Focus the limited resources where children are most at risk - which certainly is not in loving families from parent who want to raise their children to the best of their ability.

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)

-

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)

Two very damaging consequences can result:

 - children currently in vulnerable situations from bad parents, abusing them, will remain in the bad situation because social services and police are overwhelmed by trivial report.  The bill will do nothing to help currently abused children, but will in fact distract resources which are intended to help them.

 - loving families can be broken up by over-vigorous application of the law.  Loving parents can be criminalized, and children taken from their care.  The victims in this will be the children, whom the bill was supposed to protect.  It is far better for a child in a stable, loving family, than in social care by well-meaning individuals.  The government should not try to fill the role of parents.

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)

-

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)

-