# Smacking



## robinthehood (Oct 3, 2019)

Good see the Scots making moves to ban smacking children. There is never a place for this.
Will the rest of the UK follow suit?
Let's hope so.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49908849


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			Good see the Scots making moves to ban smacking children. There is never a place for this.
Will the rest of the UK follow suit?
Let's hope so.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49908849

Click to expand...

How long before, 'I was smacked and it never did me any harm'?  Great move by the Scots, hopefully the rest of the UK will follow shortly.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 3, 2019)

Are you still allowed to tie them up in the cellar, with a potato bag over their heads?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

murphthemog said:



			Are you still allowed to tie them up in the cellar, with a potato bag over their heads?
		
Click to expand...

As long as you don't smack them............


----------



## Maninblack4612 (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			How long before, 'I was smacked and it never did me any harm'?  Great move by the Scots, hopefully the rest of the UK will follow shortly.
		
Click to expand...

I was smacked (only when I really deserved it) and it never did me any harm. I was also caned at school, again thoroughly deserved. I'm not mentally scarred, bitter or twisted. Grew up respectful of my elders & generally well behaved. I must confess that my kids were smacked, rarely & for very bad behaviour which wasn't repeated. I don't think they are mentally scarred and have been law abiding well behaved citizens. 

I think the current trend of bad behaviour of a minority of young people is more attributable to the breakdown of marriages & the insecurity it brings to children than the lack of corporal punishment but its really impossible to tell which influences are to blame or eve if things really have got worse.

There are those who believe that, when all else fails, corporal punishment is the last resort. Glad I'm not now in a position where I have to decide.


----------



## need_my_wedge (Oct 3, 2019)

Maninblack4612 said:



			I was smacked (only when I really deserved it) and it never did me any harm. I was also caned at school, again thoroughly deserved. I'm not mentally scarred, bitter or twisted. Grew up respectful of my elders & generally well behaved. I must confess that my kids were smacked, rarely & for very bad behaviour which wasn't repeated. I don't think they are mentally scarred and have been law abiding well behaved citizens.

I think the current trend of bad behaviour of a minority of young people is more attributable to the breakdown of marriages & the insecurity it brings to children than the lack of corporal punishment but its really impossible to tell which influences are to blame or eve if things really have got worse.

There are those who believe that, when all else fails, corporal punishment is the last resort. Glad I'm not now in a position where I have to decide.
		
Click to expand...


I was smacked (only when I really deserved it) and it never did me any harm, aside from stinging a bit a the time, but it made us wary enough that if my parents told me not to do something, I didn't do it. I was also caned at school, just the once, and not really deserved, but I'm not mentally scarred, bitter or twisted about it. Grew up respectful of my elders & generally well behaved. I also must confess that my kids were smacked, rarely & for very bad behaviour which wasn't repeated. I can count on one hand the times I smacked each of the boys,  I don't think they are mentally scarred and have both been law abiding well behaved citizens.


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 3, 2019)

I've never hit any of my 3 kids and have never felt compelled to. It's old fashioned nonsense and there is no place for it.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			I've never hit any of my 3 kids and have never felt compelled to. It's old fashioned nonsense and there is no place for it.
		
Click to expand...

Why did you feel the need to step on to your soapbox?


----------



## DRW (Oct 3, 2019)

Tough subject and just so many answers for and against, it is hard to come down on one side of the fence.

The matter that worries me the most, is if any of you have had really difficult children how did you deal any of the really hard/tough situations you have to live with.

Sadly sometimes a hug or a 'chat' wont do anything, and doesn't solve anything and cant help but to think a smack by the parent is far better, than being cheeky to the wrong person and taking a proper kicking in or kicked out of the house or locked up in a prison cell, learning there are lines that must not be crossed in life, is part of growing up. 

I suppose my next comment is does smacking help to stop any of those situations, who knows, I certainly don't.

Tough, very tough.


----------



## Marshy77 (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			I've never hit any of my 3 kids and have never felt compelled to. It's old fashioned nonsense and there is no place for it.
		
Click to expand...

That's great for you and how you feel. Not sure about old fashioned nonsense though.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

https://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/threads/smacking-children-should-you-do-it.98731/post-1888720


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

Maninblack4612 said:



			I was smacked (only when I really deserved it) and it never did me any harm. I was also caned at school, again thoroughly deserved. I'm not mentally scarred, bitter or twisted. Grew up respectful of my elders & generally well behaved. I must confess that my kids were smacked, rarely & for very bad behaviour which wasn't repeated. I don't think they are mentally scarred and have been law abiding well behaved citizens.

*I think the current trend of bad behaviour of a minority of young people is more attributable to the breakdown of marriages & the insecurity it brings to children* than the lack of corporal punishment but its really impossible to tell which influences are to blame or eve if things really have got worse.

There are those who believe that, when all else fails, corporal punishment is the last resort. Glad I'm not now in a position where I have to decide.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with this completely. I would change it slightly in that it is a breakdown in a partnership, people don't need to be married to create stability. Complicated subject.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

My other half is a secondary school teacher. Every evening I hear first hand how unruly and disrespectful modern kids are.


----------



## Jensen (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			How long before, 'I was smacked and it never did me any harm'?  Great move by the Scots, hopefully the rest of the UK will follow shortly.
		
Click to expand...

So not do disappoint LT, I'm exactly in this category, it never did me any harm or left any scars. It taught me discipline and respect, so I endorse it ðŸ‘


----------



## Jensen (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			My other half is a secondary school teacher. Every evening I hear first hand how unruly and disrespectful modern kids are.
		
Click to expand...

They need a bloody good hiding ðŸ‘


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			My other half is a secondary school teacher. Every evening I hear first hand how unruly and disrespectful modern kids are.
		
Click to expand...

Way too sweeping a statement. The kids at that school may be unruly and disrespectful but that does not apply to all. My two went to a state school in my town. High achieving school, minimal discipline problems. It is a great school, a great environment, great culture within the school. No one gets hit there. The issue with unruly kids is nothing to do with them not being hit.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Way too sweeping a statement. The kids at that school may be unruly and disrespectful but that does not apply to all. My two went to a state school in my town. High achieving school, minimal discipline problems. It is a great school, a great environment, great culture within the school. No one gets hit there. The issue with unruly kids is nothing to do with them not being hit.
		
Click to expand...

OK, if you say so. What's the solution then?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			OK, if you say so. What's the solution then?
		
Click to expand...

There is no silver bullet but there are a few things to look at. Firstly, teacher training. A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like. There have always been naughty kids yet somehow we can all remember teachers that would hold a class in their hand. We need that knowledge of how to do it to be spread throughout. Hard to do as for some it is not their nature to be commanding, not threatening but commanding. 

You need a head teacher that enforces a good culture within the school. They need to have rules, enforce them, back the teachers. Teachers and pupils then know exactly where they stand, there are no weak lines to push against.

Pupils, as MiB pointed out a lot of problems now occur due to the breakdown of the family, a lack of positive family role models. If a school is in an area where this is prevelant then they are likely to encounter more issues. At this point the school needs a good welfare dept. They can help the kids in trouble, find out what the problems are, see what can be done for them, engage the parents (if the parents want to be engaged) If you ever watched the Educating Yorkshire programme that school was in a problem area but had a great welfare section. The ladies in there knew the home problems of the kids, tried to help them and keep them in school. Every naughty kid had a story, a reason why they did what they did. Most of them were sad stories, they needed help, hope, a reason to learn not a whack. Obviously some kids are plain horrible, get them out of the system and leave the other kids to learn.

There is more than the above, it is complicated, but it is a start.


----------



## drdel (Oct 3, 2019)

I was never hit by my parents but I was aware the threat existed - sometimes the ultimate deterrence needs to be there. Remove the deterrence and where's the line?


----------



## Liverbirdie (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There is no silver bullet but there are a few things to look at. Firstly, teacher training. A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like. There have always been naughty kids yet somehow we can all remember teachers that would hold a class in their hand. We need that knowledge of how to do it to be spread throughout. Hard to do as for some it is not their nature to be commanding, not threatening but commanding.

You need a head teacher that enforces a good culture within the school. They need to have rules, enforce them, back the teachers. Teachers and pupils then know exactly where they stand, there are no weak lines to push against.

Pupils, as MiB pointed out a lot of problems now occur due to the breakdown of the family, a lack of positive family role models. If a school is in an area where this is prevelant then they are likely to encounter more issues. At this point the school needs a good welfare dept. They can help the kids in trouble, find out what the problems are, see what can be done for them, engage the parents (if the parents want to be engaged) If you ever watched the Educating Yorkshire programme that school was in a problem area but had a great welfare section. The ladies in there knew the home problems of the kids, tried to help them and keep them in school. Every naughty kid had a story, a reason why they did what they did. Most of them were sad stories, they needed help, hope, a reason to learn not a whack. Obviously some kids are plain horrible, get them out of the system and leave the other kids to learn.

There is more than the above, it is complicated, but it is a start.
		
Click to expand...


And all in an era where more school teachers are leaving than ever before, austerity cuts are biting across the board at local council level, social workers cant keep up with their workloads, many children go to school starving.......

Where is this Nirvana, that you exist in?

There will always be badly behaved kids from all sorts of backgrounds, some change behaviour due to good teachers and more, some only when they get a smack.


----------



## DRW (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There is no silver bullet but there are a few things to look at. Firstly, teacher training. A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like. There have always been naughty kids yet somehow we can all remember teachers that would hold a class in their hand. We need that knowledge of how to do it to be spread throughout. Hard to do as for some it is not their nature to be commanding, not threatening but commanding.

You need a head teacher that enforces a good culture within the school. They need to have rules, enforce them, back the teachers. Teachers and pupils then know exactly where they stand, there are no weak lines to push against.

Pupils, as MiB pointed out a lot of problems now occur due to the breakdown of the family, a lack of positive family role models. If a school is in an area where this is prevelant then they are likely to encounter more issues. At this point the school needs a good welfare dept. They can help the kids in trouble, find out what the problems are, see what can be done for them, engage the parents (if the parents want to be engaged) If you ever watched the Educating Yorkshire programme that school was in a problem area but had a great welfare section. The ladies in there knew the home problems of the kids, tried to help them and keep them in school. Every naughty kid had a story, a reason why they did what they did. Most of them were sad stories, they needed help, hope, a reason to learn not a whack. *Obviously some kids are plain horrible, get them out of the system *and leave the other kids to learn.

There is more than the above, it is complicated, but it is a start.
		
Click to expand...

In one little sentence highlighted you have swept under the carpet the problem. That is the problem(they are in the system and remain they do, some in your words are 'plain horrible' and others due to temper and/or things going on in their life have their moments.

They are all children and need help to comply with the real world.

In the past the help as such would have been a clip around the ear or on the legs or if in school caned at the extreme(after lines/detention etc). This potentially leant them a lesson, ie. do not step over the line. It was called a deterrent.

Life is like that, break the law get locked up, give the wrong person cheek and punch in the face and so on.

What is the deterrent now, wait until your dad comes home he will give you a cuddle ? (it is hard, real hard to control, an out of control child or adult without a deterrent......)


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

DRW said:



			In one little sentence highlighted you have swept under the carpet the problem. That is the problem(they are in the system and remain they do, some in your words are 'plain horrible' and others due to temper and/or things going on in their life have their moments.

They are all children and need help to comply with the real world.

In the past the help as such would have been a clip around the ear or on the legs or if in school caned at the extreme(after lines/detention etc). This potentially leant them a lesson, ie. do not step over the line. It was called a deterrent.

Life is like that, break the law get locked up, give the wrong person cheek and punch in the face and so on.

What is the deterrent now, wait until your dad comes home he will give you a cuddle ? (it is hard, real hard to control, an out of control child or adult without a deterrent......)
		
Click to expand...

My point, that of many others, the French, and now the Scots is that hitting them doesn't work. Do the real trouble makers really fear being hit or do they laugh at it?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There is no silver bullet but there are a few things to look at. Firstly, teacher training. A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like.* There have always been naughty kids yet somehow we can all remember teachers that would hold a class in their hand. We need that knowledge of how to do it to be spread throughout. Hard to do as for some it is not their nature to be commanding, not threatening but commanding.*

You need a head teacher that enforces a good culture within the school. They need to have rules, enforce them, back the teachers. Teachers and pupils then know exactly where they stand, there are no weak lines to push against.

Pupils, as MiB pointed out a lot of problems now occur due to the breakdown of the family, a lack of positive family role models. If a school is in an area where this is prevelant then they are likely to encounter more issues. At this point the school needs a good welfare dept. They can help the kids in trouble, find out what the problems are, see what can be done for them, engage the parents (if the parents want to be engaged) If you ever watched the Educating Yorkshire programme that school was in a problem area but had a great welfare section. The ladies in there knew the home problems of the kids, tried to help them and keep them in school. Every naughty kid had a story, a reason why they did what they did. Most of them were sad stories, they needed help, hope, a reason to learn not a whack. Obviously some kids are plain horrible, get them out of the system and leave the other kids to learn.

There is more than the above, it is complicated, but it is a start.
		
Click to expand...

The teachers who commanded that were the ones that were strict , the ones that would use the cane or strap or get a slap


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There is no silver bullet but there are a few things to look at. Firstly, teacher training. A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like. There have always been naughty kids yet somehow we can all remember teachers that would hold a class in their hand. We need that knowledge of how to do it to be spread throughout. Hard to do as for some it is not their nature to be commanding, not threatening but commanding.

You need a head teacher that enforces a good culture within the school. They need to have rules, enforce them, back the teachers. Teachers and pupils then know exactly where they stand, there are no weak lines to push against.

Pupils, as MiB pointed out a lot of problems now occur due to the breakdown of the family, a lack of positive family role models. If a school is in an area where this is prevelant then they are likely to encounter more issues. At this point the school needs a good welfare dept. They can help the kids in trouble, find out what the problems are, see what can be done for them, engage the parents (if the parents want to be engaged) If you ever watched the Educating Yorkshire programme that school was in a problem area but had a great welfare section. The ladies in there knew the home problems of the kids, tried to help them and keep them in school. Every naughty kid had a story, a reason why they did what they did. Most of them were sad stories, they needed help, hope, a reason to learn not a whack. Obviously some kids are plain horrible, get them out of the system and leave the other kids to learn.

There is more than the above, it is complicated, but it is a start.
		
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you are way off the mark. Teachers have no power. They cannot physically touch a pupil in any way without putting their job at risk. It is a common occurrence for pupils to tell my G/F to eff off and the worst she can do is hand out a detention that the child may or may not decide to turn up for. She works at a high performing school with some of the best results in Dorset. 
Once it is accepted that our softly softly approach is creating a problem then maybe something will be done to fix it but I fear we have gone beyond the point of no return.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 3, 2019)

Big difference between a parent smacking a kid and a school teacher.
The op is about banning parents, if the kid comes from an abusive family, god help them.
The kids need protecting from abuse, unfortunately I believe itâ€™s probably impossible to ban varying degrees of smacking.
A gentle tap on the nappy, cold hands on a warm oven etc, done in the name of education, very difficult line to walk and not too short a leap to a possible over the top reaction from a parent.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

pauldj42 said:



			Big difference between a parent smacking a kid and a school teacher.
The op is about banning parents, if the kid comes from an abusive family, god help them.
The kids need protecting from abuse, unfortunately I believe itâ€™s probably impossible to ban varying degrees of smacking.
A gentle tap on the nappy, cold hands on a warm oven etc, done in the name of education, very difficult line to walk and not too short a leap to a possible over the top reaction from a parent.
		
Click to expand...

Agree Paul but the majority of parents from our generation seemed to manage it.


----------



## DRW (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			My point, that of many others, the French, and now the Scots is that hitting them doesn't work. Do the real trouble makers really fear being hit or do they laugh at it?
		
Click to expand...

Any actual proof that not smacking works, any proper studies or just peoples words ? Interested if there is and also how they coped with the children ?

Taking those thoughts to the extreme, if there are no deterrents in life....do you think many adults would care about stealing and other crimes you would consider unacceptable now ? There are many cases of people stealing, who you would think would never, but they thought they would get away with it.

For the general population, deterrents and the possibility of being caught are needed to ensure the person does not do x,y,z against the law.

In respect of a child, I do not agree with abuse or smashing a child, however learning the facts and lines in life, smacking is not the end of the world...and as I posted in the other thread, using mental torture/abuse to control a child, personally I think is worse than a clip. I can remember one of our relations, who used to wash their childrens months out with soap, still cant believe someone doing that to a child 

Preventing a naughty child from being naughty is not easy, its tough real tough.


----------



## need_my_wedge (Oct 3, 2019)

drdel said:



			I was never hit by my parents but I was aware the threat existed - sometimes the ultimate deterrence needs to be there. Remove the deterrence and where's the line?
		
Click to expand...

That's why I can count on one hand the number of tmes I used it. At first, it was "don't do that", then a second warning threatening a slap, if they carried on it was a slap. After a couple of times dishing a slap, it became "don't do that" the first time, then "do you want a slap" the second time, there was no need for a third warning, the threat was deterrent enough.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

DRW said:



			Preventing a naughty child from being naughty is not easy, its tough real tough.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed and the younger a child is disciplined the sooner it learns.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

DRW said:



			Any actual proof that not smacking works, any proper studies or just peoples words ? Interested if there is and also how they coped with the children ?

Taking those thoughts to the extreme, if there are no deterrents in life....do you think many adults would care about stealing and other crimes you would consider unacceptable now ? There are many cases of people stealing, who you would think would never, but they thought they would get away with it.

For the general population, deterrents and the possibility of being caught are needed to ensure the person does not do x,y,z against the law.

In respect of a child, I do not agree with abuse or smashing a child, however learning the facts and lines in life, smacking is not the end of the world...and as I posted in the other thread, using mental torture/abuse to control a child, personally I think is worse than a clip. I can remember one of our relations, who used to wash their childrens months out with soap, still cant believe someone doing that to a child 

Preventing a naughty child from being naughty is not easy, its tough real tough.
		
Click to expand...

For general studies I would suggest looking at anything by Dr Tanya Byron, a child Psychologist. As to individual studies, not my field I'm afraid. 

Apparently there are now 58 countries where smacking is against the law. They are likely to be doing it for a reason

I agree there need to be deterrents but why physical? If that worked why do we not hit adults who have done wrong? There are plenty of deterrents to use on kids, it is just about working out what works with each one.


----------



## Don Barzini (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			My other half is a secondary school teacher. Every evening I hear first hand how unruly and disrespectful modern kids are.
		
Click to expand...


*â€œThe children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.â€    *

*- Socrates (469-399BC)

*


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			I'm afraid you are way off the mark. Teachers have no power. They cannot physically touch a pupil in any way without putting their job at risk. It is a common occurrence for pupils to tell my G/F to eff off and the worst she can do is hand out a detention that the child may or may not decide to turn up for. She works at a high performing school with some of the best results in Dorset.
Once it is accepted that our softly softly approach is creating a problem then maybe something will be done to fix it but I fear we have gone beyond the point of no return.
		
Click to expand...

They haven't been able to touch a kid for 40+ years, nothing new there. Your G/F needs better backing from her head if that is allowed to ride.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The teachers who commanded that were the ones that were strict , the ones that would use the cane or strap or get a slap
		
Click to expand...

What era did you go to school? Seriously, I am pretty sure you are not old enough to be of that time.

I'm 49 and that was not allowed. Good teachers controlled their classes no matter who was in them, without canes, straps or slaps.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			They haven't been able to touch a kid for 40+ years, nothing new there. Your G/F needs better backing from her head if that is allowed to ride.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but if that is all you can come up with then you are part of the problem.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 3, 2019)

I am 54, caning was common place. As was the slipper, or a ruler. Picking kids up by the hair was frowned on, but not forbidden. Getting hit by a black board rubber wasn't pleasant either, but then you should be paying attention. Oddly, catching the flipping thing earned you a caning for being smart.

The one that always got me was everyone who hadn't had a whack during the day had to queue up at the end, and get one anyway, on the basis you probably just hadn't been caught. Nice.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Sorry but if that is all you can come up with then you are part of the problem.
		
Click to expand...

That is a ridiculous statement.


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			What era did you go to school? Seriously, I am pretty sure you are not old enough to be of that time.

I'm 49 and that was not allowed. Good teachers controlled their classes no matter who was in them, without canes, straps or slaps.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think it was banned untill the 80s. Although it was never used at schools I went to. 
It's an archaic practice,  I don't see how the threat of violence can  be anyway conducive to good behaviour.


----------



## GB72 (Oct 3, 2019)

I agree that there needs to be some form of deterrent but it can be a beneficial one. Ok I went to private school and so have not experienced many of the problems that others face and corporal punishment was always a threat in my early school days. The good old note to the parents used to work as the parents in the 70s would apply a suitable punishment and make it stick. I feel some parents cave in on a given punishment after only a few days.

On the more beneficial side, in later life punishment was running laps, after school pt sessions, writing out lists of important dates (amazing how many I still remember) and good old detention for an hour after school. Privileges were also removed and so you could not leave school grounds at lunchtime when everyone else went into town or you were dropped from school sports teams until the teacher reported an improvement in behaviour.

All of these were good deterrents and I do feel that some form of enforceable deterrent is needed. Thing is that parents need to support this and support teachers where some seem to bury their head in the sand and complain that it cannot possibly be their kid and even get abusive if the punishment inconveniences them.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			I don't think it was banned untill the 80s. Although it was never used at schools I went to.
It's an archaic practice,  I don't see how the threat of violence can  be anyway conducive to good behaviour.
		
Click to expand...

You may be right about the banning, I just don't ever remember it exisiting then. It certainly did not at the schools I went to, standard state schools.

Totally agree with you, it is Victorian stuff.


----------



## DRW (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			I don't think it was banned untill the 80s. Although it was never used at schools I went to.
It's an archaic practice,  I don't see how the threat of violence can  be anyway conducive to good behaviour.
		
Click to expand...

I am 50 and remember canning & slipper still being around at secondary school(well certainly the first couple years at a guess, maybe it was banned whilst I was there?). Remember seeing one lads bum that had been canned by the head and thought knickers to that.

The good or bad teachers still had problems with the real naughty children, it was normally the strict teachers were the ones that controlled the class the best. IIRC the two teachers who used the slipper(think only once in my class and sure that stopped after the first year but memory is a bit hazy, blocked it all out), were the teachers no one messed with... Not saying it was right.


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There is no silver bullet but there are a few things to look at. Firstly, teacher training. A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like. There have always been naughty kids yet somehow we can all remember teachers that would hold a class in their hand. We need that knowledge of how to do it to be spread throughout. Hard to do as for some it is not their nature to be commanding, not threatening but commanding.

You need a head teacher that enforces a good culture within the school. They need to have rules, enforce them, back the teachers. Teachers and pupils then know exactly where they stand, there are no weak lines to push against.

Pupils, as MiB pointed out a lot of problems now occur due to the breakdown of the family, a lack of positive family role models. If a school is in an area where this is prevelant then they are likely to encounter more issues. At this point the school needs a good welfare dept. They can help the kids in trouble, find out what the problems are, see what can be done for them, engage the parents (if the parents want to be engaged) If you ever watched the Educating Yorkshire programme that school was in a problem area but had a great welfare section. The ladies in there knew the home problems of the kids, tried to help them and keep them in school. Every naughty kid had a story, a reason why they did what they did. Most of them were sad stories, they needed help, hope, a reason to learn not a whack. *Obviously some kids are plain horrible, get them out of the system* and leave the other kids to learn.

There is more than the above, it is complicated, but it is a start.
		
Click to expand...

It was going so well until the bold bit!

Btw. My ex was one of those teachers (ended up as a Deputy Head) who could spot the kid(s) that simply needed a hug and was quite capable of doing so. And at 5'4 in high heels, she could also reduce big, gangly bullies to jibbering wrecks within 15 seconds!


----------



## DRW (Oct 3, 2019)

murphthemog said:



			I am 54, caning was common place. As was the slipper, or a ruler. Picking kids up by the hair was frowned on, but not forbidden. Getting hit by a black board rubber wasn't pleasant either, but then you should be paying attention. Oddly, catching the flipping thing earned you a caning for being smart.

The one that always got me was everyone who hadn't had a whack during the day had to queue up at the end, and get one anyway, on the basis you probably just hadn't been caught. Nice.
		
Click to expand...

Hope that isn't a real story, made me chuckle tho and I feel dirty for laughing at it in case it is a real story, cheers


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

Foxholer said:



			It was going so well until the bold bit!

Btw. My ex was one of those teachers (ended up as a Deputy Head) who could spot the kid(s) that simply needed a hug and was quite capable of doing so. And at 5'4 in high heels, she could also reduce big, gangly bullies to jibbering wrecks within 15 seconds!
		
Click to expand...

Sorry about that. It was a sop to the whackers so they didn't think I was a complete hippy . I was not referring then to very young kids, more certain 15-16yr olds who can at that stage be beyond redemption within a school system.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 3, 2019)

They still actually birched people when I was very young.
The taws, a belt on the @rse with a gym shoe or a clip round the ear was normal in my time at Secondary school. [1960's]
The teachers who used physical punishment were nearly always the poor ones who could not control a class.

Hitting a child is nowadays is very 'old school'.
Well done the Scottish Government.
First in the UK with smoking in public ban, plastic shopping bag ban, minimum alcohol pricing and now smacking.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 3, 2019)

Doon frae Troon said:



			They still actually birched people when I was very young.
The taws, a belt on the @rse with a gym shoe or a clip round the ear was normal in my time at Secondary school. [1960's]
The teachers who used physical punishment were nearly always the poor ones who could not control a class.

Hitting a child is nowadays is very 'old school'.
Well done the Scottish Government.
First in the UK with smoking in public ban, plastic shopping bag ban, minimum alcohol pricing and now smacking.
		
Click to expand...

I got quite a lot of the belt (tawse) at school as I could be a bit of a cheeky smart alec pain in the backside.  Indeed I would wind up one teacher in a deliberate attempt to get her to belt me - she was hopeless and so I thought it was funny...

My BIG worry was that my dad would find out,  as he did when I got five off the heedie and my hands were so swollen I couldn't help but he found out.  And for that I got a skelp off my dad when home.  I made sure I never got belted by the heedie again.

So even back in the day getting the belt at school had little or no impact unless the home environment supported what was going on at school.  I had respect for my dad - he expected respect given the sacrifices that he and my mum made for us children.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

Getting the belt across the hands was common place at my middle school (9 - 13 yrs) and quite a few of the school idiots did get belted regularly, for them it was seen as a mark respect among their peers. Did that mentally scar them or give them respect, I wouldn't think so, for the most part the majority of them were bad apples and one I know did and up serving time, still is I believe.

As for getting smacked, I was smacked occasionally as a kid and it did me no harm, I smacked my daughter once, but mainly it was my loud shouty voice which was sufficient to bring her into line.

Do I think banning smacking is correct, no I do not, its just more mamby pamby nanny state officialdom. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen parents who are clearly against smacking telling their kid off in a supermarket...

... in a very softly spoken voice the parent is speaking to their kid who is kicking off and just repeats over over to try and calm the kid, when a smack or a loud shout** would be sufficient shock to jar the kid back into line.  

**I will caveat that though with, just what you see may not be the whole story. My other half works with autistic kids and something could've triggered the kid and being calm is the only way to resolve the issue, so in somewhat contradicting myself, it's best not to judge based on just what you see.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

In addtion to my scrawlings above, the state should bring back public floggings, coporal punishment, the birch to those who offend. I don't care that this is a modern civilised society, going medievel in punishment for some crimes could be a better deterrent that a judge giving 50 hours community service.


----------



## Marshy77 (Oct 3, 2019)

As a teacher you're not allowed to give a child a hug.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 3, 2019)

I don't see the use of it as a bad thing tbh. I'm just about young enough that it never happened at school. Could tell some of the teachers missed it.


My issue with parents doing it is more that some use it for everything. Spill a drink, slap. Be cheeky, slap. Don't instantly clean their room, slap. I saw a mum slap her little kid of about 2/3 recently because he wouldnt eat his lunch! That'll have kids terrified and obviously isn't when it should be used.

I've not laid a hand on my girls and hopefully I'll never have too. Them being a little gobby or lazy etc wouldnt have me consider it. But if I found them bullying for example then theyd be left in no uncertain terms they'd had their one warning.

In later life certain things have harsh punishments, but if they've never had to consider them before then they may not be too concerned.

As to the discussion about bad classes being beciase of poor teachers. We had some aweso e teachers at school, now I look back at some of their efforts


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			In addtion to my scrawlings above, *the state should bring back public floggings, coporal punishment, the birch to those who offend. *I don't care that this is a modern civilised society, going medievel in punishment for some crimes could be a better deterrent that a judge giving 50 hours community service.
		
Click to expand...

Not then much of a step to return of capital punishment.  No, No thrice No

You don't need to physically hit someone to humiliate or shame them - if that is what you are after.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not then much of a step to return of capital punishment.  No, No thrice No
		
Click to expand...

String em up I say ðŸ¤£


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Sorry about that. It was a sop to the whackers so they didn't think I was a complete hippy . I was not referring then to very young kids, more certain 15-16yr olds who can at that stage be beyond redemption within a school system.
		
Click to expand...

Nor was I!

It was those 15-16yr olds (and maybe a year or so younger) that I was referring to/she dealt with (as teacher and DH at a 'difficult' 2ndry school) too.

Do you have a solution for those 'beyond redemption' or are you simply going to cast them on the scrap-heap?


----------



## need_my_wedge (Oct 3, 2019)

murphthemog said:



			I am 54, caning was common place. As was the slipper, or a ruler. Picking kids up by the hair was frowned on, but not forbidden. Getting hit by a black board rubber wasn't pleasant either, but then you should be paying attention. Oddly, catching the flipping thing earned you a caning for being smart.

The one that always got me was everyone who hadn't had a whack during the day had to queue up at the end, and get one anyway, on the basis you probably just hadn't been caught. Nice.
		
Click to expand...

I'm 54 too, went to a grammar school in London for a couple of years. We had a Greek math teacher that was very fond of chucking a wooden board eraser at you if you were talking or not paying attention. We had a crazy French teacher that had his own personal short cane in the drawer, you'd get it across the hand if you misbehaved, he would only send down for the official cane (with the record book) for repeat offenders. I had the cane on the hand one time, it hurt a lot. I remember seeing him give someone 6 of the best with the official cane once, the way he whipped through really was enough to deter me and most everyone else. The RE teacher kept a slipper in his drawer, we also had a PE teacher who would make you all kneel in a line for any one person misbehaving, and he would walk the length of line behind you, giving everyone a tap on the head with a cricket bat.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not then much of a step to return of capital punishment.  No, No thrice No

You don't need to physically hit someone to humiliate or shame them - if that is what you are after.
		
Click to expand...

Very true you do not, but after 15mins minutes of humiliation, all is forgotten, unless the criminal is a particular sensitive sole, but remember the pain of a public flogging would last a lot longer.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Oct 3, 2019)

murphthemog said:



			I am 54, caning was common place. As was the slipper, or a ruler. Picking kids up by the hair was frowned on, but not forbidden. Getting hit by a black board rubber wasn't pleasant either, but then you should be paying attention. Oddly, catching the flipping thing earned you a caning for being smart.

The one that always got me was everyone who hadn't had a whack during the day had to queue up at the end, and get one anyway, on the basis you probably just hadn't been caught. Nice.
		
Click to expand...

You sound old enough to have also been picked up from your chair by your sideburns.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			I don't think it was banned untill the 80s. Although it was never used at schools I went to.
It's an archaic practice,  I don't see how the threat of violence can  be anyway conducive to good behaviour.
		
Click to expand...

We built an empire on that.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 3, 2019)

DRW said:



			Hope that isn't a real story, made me chuckle tho and I feel dirty for laughing at it in case it is a real story, cheers

Click to expand...

True as. Little Irish lady. Mental as. At the end of the year she cried, as she loved us all so much, and we were moving up a year. We would never have guessed.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Oct 3, 2019)

GB72 said:



			I agree that there needs to be some form of deterrent but it can be a beneficial one. Ok I went to private school and so have not experienced many of the problems that others face and corporal punishment was always a threat in my early school days. The good old note to the parents used to work as the parents in the 70s would apply a suitable punishment and make it stick. I feel some parents cave in on a given punishment after only a few days.

On the more beneficial side, in later life punishment was running laps, after school pt sessions, writing out lists of important dates (amazing how many I still remember) and good old detention for an hour after school. Privileges were also removed and so you could not leave school grounds at lunchtime when everyone else went into town or you were dropped from school sports teams until the teacher reported an improvement in behaviour.

All of these were good deterrents and I do feel that some form of enforceable deterrent is needed. Thing is that parents need to support this and support teachers where some seem to bury their head in the sand and complain that it cannot possibly be their kid and even get abusive if the punishment inconveniences them.
		
Click to expand...

if it was a boarding school (so there 24 hours in a day), can understand how things like that can have more of an effect.

One of the big differences of the last 10-20 years (IMHO) ** cliche alert ** was if you told your parents you had been strapped / caned etc you would be reprimanded for it, with the school getting the benefit of the doubt, its 180 degree turn now, with a "oh no, my little johnny would never do that sort of thing" benefit of the doubt to the kids.

Smacking should be optional for a parent, but excesses punished by law.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			What era did you go to school? Seriously, I am pretty sure you are not old enough to be of that time.

I'm 49 and that was not allowed. Good teachers controlled their classes no matter who was in them, without canes, straps or slaps.
		
Click to expand...

Iâ€™m 46 and it was allowed in my school


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverbirdie said:



			We built an empire on that.

Click to expand...

Jersey and the isle of man ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ and some windswept islands in the South Atlantic.  
thats some empire


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 3, 2019)

Foxholer said:



			Nor was I!

It was those 15-16yr olds (and maybe a year or so younger) that I was referring to/she dealt with (as teacher and DH at a 'difficult' 2ndry school) too.

Do you have a solution for those 'beyond redemption' or are you simply going to cast them on the scrap-heap?
		
Click to expand...

Claiming a solution would be too strong. There are certainly some who are not suited to school and the lessons there. They may be better suited to a college or a more practical style of education. My son is now at university, my daughter doing her A levels this year. I've seen first hand friends of theirs who struggled at GCSE because the subjects held no interest or they simply struggled. None really kicked off but some started to get into some trouble as they were bored. Having to stay in education now, 16-18, they went to 6th form colleges as the school would not have them back. Most have thrived as they have found a practical subject which suits them, something that schools are not set up to teach. Speaking to their parents since the worry has left them as they have largely straightened out. The point of this ramble is that some of the problems they cause happen because they are bored at school. That will not change because the subjects on offer will not fit them. Ideally what is on offer at 16-18 via colleges or apprenticeships would be on offer earlier but I appreciate this is not financially viable.

The difficult part, why some get sent to special measures schools and having a friend who has worked in one of those I know what a dead end they can be, is what do you do with those who continue to aggravate, who refuse the help on offer? If you leave them in the mainstream then they can affect the rest of the class, they then have their education, their exam results put at risk. That can't be allowed, surely? It is a last resort but sometimes kids have to be taken out of the system for the sake of the others in the school. How you bring them back, help them, is mighty tricky but I suspect it needs a good amount of one on one help, teaching, guidance from specialised staff, of which I would guess there is not enough of on the whole.

I am certainly not claiming to know all of the answers on this very tricky subject. I am pretty sure though that smacking kids at any age is wrong.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Claiming a solution would be too strong. There are certainly some who are not suited to school and the lessons there. They may be better suited to a college or a more practical style of education. My son is now at university, my daughter doing her A levels this year. I've seen first hand friends of theirs who struggled at GCSE because the subjects held no interest or they simply struggled. None really kicked off but some started to get into some trouble as they were bored. Having to stay in education now, 16-18, they went to 6th form colleges as the school would not have them back. Most have thrived as they have found a practical subject which suits them, something that schools are not set up to teach. Speaking to their parents since the worry has left them as they have largely straightened out. The point of this ramble is that some of the problems they cause happen because they are bored at school. That will not change because the subjects on offer will not fit them. Ideally what is on offer at 16-18 via colleges or apprenticeships would be on offer earlier but I appreciate this is not financially viable.

The difficult part, why some get sent to special measures schools and having a friend who has worked in one of those I know what a dead end they can be, is what do you do with those who continue to aggravate, who refuse the help on offer? If you leave them in the mainstream then they can affect the rest of the class, they then have their education, their exam results put at risk. That can't be allowed, surely? It is a last resort but sometimes kids have to be taken out of the system for the sake of the others in the school. How you bring them back, help them, is mighty tricky but I suspect it needs a good amount of one on one help, teaching, guidance from specialised staff, of which I would guess there is not enough of on the whole.

I am certainly not claiming to know all of the answers on this very tricky subject. I am pretty sure though that smacking kids at any age is wrong.
		
Click to expand...

Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. They are a massive drain on the system as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.


----------



## GB72 (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverbirdie said:



			if it was a boarding school (so there 24 hours in a day), can understand how things like that can have more of an effect.

One of the big differences of the last 10-20 years (IMHO) ** cliche alert ** was if you told your parents you had been strapped / caned etc you would be reprimanded for it, with the school getting the benefit of the doubt, its 180 degree turn now, with a "oh no, my little johnny would never do that sort of thing" benefit of the doubt to the kids.

Smacking should be optional for a parent, but excesses punished by law.
		
Click to expand...

School was part boarding but I was a day boy. Many of the punishments were carried out once a week and so parents had notice that you would be an hour late. Also had school on Saturday mornings and so punishment sessions that held you back after that were particularly feared. Others were held at lunchtime.


----------



## pokerjoke (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. They are a massive drain on the system as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.
		
Click to expand...


My wife works in safe guarding and helping get problem children back into school.
99% of the time the problem is the parents or more significantly parent.
It costs a helluva lot of money and time to help these children,however itâ€™s important to get them back to normal school quickly to prevent bigger social problems later.

My dad smacked me a lot and hard,I deserved punishment but not a beating,once my mum had to pull him off me as he nearly broke my arm.
I hated him and threatened to kill him when I was old enough for which he just laughed.
I still think about it so it did effect me.
I promised never to hot mine and Iâ€™m proud to say I never have and never will.
My dad had 4 jobs and was never around and now I know why.
He was providing for the family,obviously tired and under pressure.
I respect him now more than ever because of what he was doing for me and the family.
I send my kids out every day with the words
â€œ be nice to everyone and they will be nice to you.
Be careful donâ€™t take risks and respect everyone â€œ seems to work they are great kids.


----------



## JT77 (Oct 3, 2019)

I was lucky when I grew up, never got hit that often, once by my mother, which I deserved, got a ruler across the knuckles in school, a couple times, again, I probably deserved something, it taught me to not do that again, or make the same mistake twice, and did not do me any harm.  Sometimes the issue is not the smacking, its that some people do not know when to stop. 

I have 3 kids, I have not had to smack any of them, they all are well behaved, most of the time, and all are polite and well mannered, however, though we have never hit them, there was always the threat, the look and the stern tone, again, maybe I've just been lucky.  We were fortunate that my wife has only had to return to work through choice in the last year or so, so my 3 all had their mother at home throughout the early years, a luxury not many can afford now, and she was able to devote her time to them, sometimes I think maybe children act up because they need attention from somewhere. 

I am not convinced banning smacking is the answer, it is no longer there as a deterrent whether used or not, again, I don't think the smacking is the issue, its some people don't know when to stop.


----------



## hovis (Oct 3, 2019)

at the end of the day kids need to know that parents mean business.  for me this is simply achieved by taking away her dolls or other toys.  I don't believe in beating a child but I wouldn't be opposed to a slap. 

funnily enough, all the parents that I know from this anti smack group are the ones that have little gits for children that no one likes.   however, in their eyes they are angels. 

i was only smacked once, maybe twice as a child.  that was enough for me to stick to the boundaries and not push my luck.


----------



## TheDiablo (Oct 3, 2019)

I don't think there is any situation where I would think resorting to force against my child is acceptable.

If it ever happens it will be a reflection of a failure to control my emotions at that point, which would be something to regret. 

Using force to control behaviour at a young age isnt a good thing. It normalises a behaivour I personally don't think is a good trait.


----------



## Dando (Oct 3, 2019)

donâ€™t remember being smacked as a kid but when i was 9 I told my sister to fcuk off so my parents washed my mouth out with soap and water! 
Iâ€™ve haven't sworn since 

* some of the above may not be true


----------



## Grant85 (Oct 3, 2019)

Seems bizarre that children have not had the same legal protection as an adult in terms of what amounts to assault. 

I guess in reality it will probably not impact many people. Any sensible people will not smack or hit their children, but no doubt a lot of people still do and may well continue to and get away with it. 

Will be interesting to see when the law is 1st tested what the dynamics are and if we end up seeing otherwise good and loving parents criminalised for a moment of madness.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			My other half is a secondary school teacher. Every evening I hear first hand how unruly and disrespectful modern kids are.
		
Click to expand...

My daughter is a teacher  and she has more trouble with the parents than the children.
The general public are mostly nice people but there are exceptions.


----------



## 2blue (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			My other half is a secondary school teacher. Every evening I hear first hand how unruly and disrespectful modern kids are* ALLOWED TO BE*.
		
Click to expand...

The School needs to seriously look at it 'Behaviour Policy'........  corporal punishment in the 21st Century is a definite *NO, NO. *
However I bet if there was a Referendum on this & the Death Penalty I think I know how it would go.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Oct 3, 2019)

2blue said:



			The School needs to seriously look at it 'Behaviour Policy'........  corporal punishment in the 21st Century is a definite *NO, NO. *
However I bet if there was a Referendum on this & the Death Penalty I think I know how it would go. 

Click to expand...

How bad has a child got to be to get the death penalty.


----------



## 2blue (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. *They are a massive drain on the system *as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.
		
Click to expand...

As they're a product of our society its our responsibility to accommodate them.


----------



## 2blue (Oct 3, 2019)

clubchamp98 said:



			How bad has a child got to be to get the death penalty.
		
Click to expand...

If they fail to accept a 'smack' as a behaviour correction method of course.......  come on, work these things out please.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 3, 2019)

clubchamp98 said:



			How bad has a child got to be to get the death penalty.
		
Click to expand...

Get less than 70% in a spelling test.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

2blue said:



			The School needs to seriously look at it 'Behaviour Policy'........  corporal punishment in the 21st Century is a definite *NO, NO. *

Click to expand...

Are you aware of just how little authority teachers and schools have nowadays? And who mentioned corporal punishment?


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

clubchamp98 said:



			My daughter is a teacher  and she has more trouble with the parents than the children.
The general public are mostly nice people but there are exceptions.
		
Click to expand...

Maybe we are seeing the results of the first generation of kids brought up in a 'softly softly' environment. Who knows.....just saying.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

2blue said:



			As they're a product of our society its our responsibility to accommodate them.
		
Click to expand...

Yep not arguing against that but the point is we have a finite amount of resource to look after all children so how do we distribute the resources we have to look after them? Biased towards the problem children at the expense of normal ones?


----------



## ColchesterFC (Oct 3, 2019)

murphthemog said:



			Get less than 70% in a spelling test.
		
Click to expand...

Typical softy liberal approach. It should be a minimum of 95%.


----------



## 2blue (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



*Are you aware of just how little authority teachers and schools have nowadays?* And who mentioned corporal punishment?
		
Click to expand...

This obviously depends on the School's Behaviour Policy......  35 years teaching in a deprived area in an inner City School tends to make one aware.....  kids changed little during those 35 years but how we dealt with their issues did......  & that's the School's Behaviour Policy


----------



## 2blue (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Yep not arguing against that but the point is we have a finite amount of resource to look after all children so how do we distribute the resources we have to look after them? Biased towards the problem children at the expense of normal ones?
		
Click to expand...

Certainly not by pitting one group of children against another.


----------



## TheDiablo (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Maybe we are seeing the results of the first generation of kids brought up in a 'softly softly' environment. Who knows.....just saying.
		
Click to expand...

And what 'results' are they exactly?


----------



## Imurg (Oct 3, 2019)

need_my_wedge said:



			I'm 54 too, went to a grammar school in London for a couple of years. We had a Greek math teacher that was very fond of chucking a wooden board eraser at you if you were talking or not paying attention. We had a crazy French teacher that had his own personal short cane in the drawer, you'd get it across the hand if you misbehaved, he would only send down for the official cane (with the record book) for repeat offenders. I had the cane on the hand one time, it hurt a lot. I remember seeing him give someone 6 of the best with the official cane once, the way he whipped through really was enough to deter me and most everyone else. The RE teacher kept a slipper in his drawer, we also had a PE teacher who would make you all kneel in a line for any one person misbehaving, and he would walk the length of line behind you, giving everyone a tap on the head with a cricket bat.
		
Click to expand...

Sounds very like my Grammar school......
I got a couple of lashes with the cane for passing messages in a 3rd form maths exam...messages were about that afternoon's form cricket team....


----------



## Backache (Oct 3, 2019)

Not quite sure what this law is for . 
Hitting your child with aggression is already an offense , if you leave marks , hit them repeatedly etc you can be charged and rightfully so. 
I am not particularly keen on smacking but I wonder what does more harm to a family a very occasional smack perhaps becuase the parent is genuinely fearful as a child has run across the road or prosecuting ,dividing and criminalising a family.
By and large it is not excessive punishment that is the problem but a lack on caring and nurturing . I don't see this law encouraging that which is where resources should be directed.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 3, 2019)

ColchesterFC said:



			Typical softy liberal approach. It should be a minimum of 95%. 

Click to expand...

That is harsh. 95% is loss of a limb, surely?


----------



## Wolf (Oct 3, 2019)

I only ever got smacked once by my dad, it wasn't out of frustration or anger at me for being naughty but more through fear for the fact I'd as 9 year old sneaked out the house without him knowing and he'd spent over an hour looking for me worrying something had happen to me.  I never did anything again that didn't involve in being honest with my parents from that day to this. 

I've never smacked anyone of my kids, never felt the need to even when they're really pushing it, we've our own way of disciplining them and it works without argument from them or back chat. 

I do think teachers need more support with unruly children, but modern society doesn't help with the way a lot of kids are being brought up. Not an easy conundrum to solve and I don't envy the teachers of this world


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 3, 2019)

https://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/threads/smacking-children-should-you-do-it.98731/page-2

Well 12 months down the line , my daughter is older and at times has been naughty- not once felt like a smack is needed . 

As can be seen by the previous thread itâ€™s certainly a generation thing - most of our parents smacked up at some point and yep wouldnâ€™t have done any damage but there are others out there who would have been damaged. Itâ€™s the right move and hopefully all follow


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. They are a massive drain on the system as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.
		
Click to expand...

Depends on how you class 'special needs', those who have autism (depending on the level) will work in mainstream, others will work outside and will have specially trained teachers and for the most part will not, or will only interact in mainstream periodically.

However, if you are meaning special needs as those who are just unruly, disruptive and a bad influence then they can require special requirements and can be a drain, but those kids should not be confused with those that do suffer from a recognisable and known disability. In writing the aforemention it could well be that those 2% you mention could have an undiagnosed disabilty and the disruption they create is likely unintentional.

but

They are those who are just plain ignorant, stupid, do not care and no matter what you do will not change because of their home environment, but then you enter whole different topic.


----------



## Karl102 (Oct 3, 2019)

"You will continue to suffer if you have an emotional reaction to everything that is said to you. True power is sitting back and observing everything with logic. If words control you that means everyone else can control you. Breathe and allow things to pass"
Bruce Lee ðŸ˜‰ðŸ˜‰ðŸ˜‰

Secondary school deputy head here in charge of behaviour.... So many contributing factors that heighten anxiety in young people today that were not around several yrs ago, social media, increasing domestic violence, computer games that gratify DV and violence, shortage of teachers, retention of existing good teachers, under resourced social care system, Americanisation of some behaviours and cultures (gangs/crime), the need for increasing child mental health services and I could go on. 
Some would say an individuals behaviour is a function and a result of the environment they are brought up it, some would disagree and go with the nature 'born with it' approach. Both are valid. I see both cases regularly in school and do not have the answer. 
For those interested pivotal education have a you tube channel that supports school and parental behaviour and the Bill Rogers behaviour management in school vids are worth a watch. See if what he says resonates with your school days, I bet it doesn't in most cases. He's dull, but he does speak sense....


----------



## Karl102 (Oct 3, 2019)

Oh... And I would also ban smacking...


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverpoolphil said:



https://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/threads/smacking-children-should-you-do-it.98731/page-2

Well 12 months down the line , my daughter is older and at times has been naughty- not once felt like a smack is needed .

As can be seen by the previous thread itâ€™s certainly a generation thing - most of our parents smacked up at some point and yep wouldnâ€™t have done any damage but there are others out there who would have been damaged. Itâ€™s the right move and hopefully all follow
		
Click to expand...


All well and good, but when you have a perfectly heathly able body and able mind child having a proper melt down tantrum in the middle tesco's and Mum or Dad is just saying talking to the kid and nothing is happening, well.....

Annie stop it or I'll say stop it again, and again and again

And then they think they talking has worked because the kid has stopped the tantrum some 15mins later, no the talking didn't work the kid most likely couldn't even hear the parent talking, the kid stopped because it got bored. So you're a parent with a lot of patience, whoop dee doo, you stand there like a prize plum with no control over your kid. 

As is the topic of this thread, same situation, if that was me, my mam would've made sure I was looking at her and I would've got the line "what you crying for? shut up or I wil give yousomething to cry for.", that would genreally work, but if not, there was a smack incoming, and that wouild definitely work. Standing there for 15mins while I calmed down, I don't think so.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. They are a massive drain on the system as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.
		
Click to expand...

Id suggest there are lots of kids who use up more of a teachers time and resources that donâ€™t have special needs. Also, the schools can get financial assistance for the extra help. If you mean that kids with special needs are simply using resources for teaching in general from national budgets for education then whatever school they go to wouldnâ€™t matter. Iâ€™d imagine a special school costs more to to run than mainstream. So maybe all kids should go to mainstream school and just absorb the costs there. 

What alternative is there. Pre screen all births and any chance of a special need force abortion? Or donâ€™t educate them at all? Then spend how much basically looking after them? Iâ€™m biased in this chat as Iâ€™ve a daughter with mild cerebral palsy. She has an assistant, but if she went to one of the social schools she wouldnâ€™t be anywhere near as bright as she is now because the hopes at those school are more based on becoming a function member of society than one that may contribute once theyâ€™ve gone on to have a career. 

IMO, your calling it a harsh decision is to put it mildly, very out of touch.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

So smacking a kid gets made law everywhere, a parent then smakcs the kid, the kid reports the parent to the police, the parent is then prosecuted and worse case gets a custodial sentence, unlikely but not impossible, or the parent is not allowed to be unsuppervised with children at all.

What then happens to the kid? Who looks after the kid? If it was as ingle parent family, does the kid enter up in foster care? a home for smacked children?

The parent then gets a criminal record, perhaps loses their job and cannot get another.

The above may be the extreme, but in todays society is the above that niaive and extreme?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			All well and good, but when you have a perfectly heathly able body and able mind child having a proper melt down tantrum in the middle tesco's and Mum or Dad is just saying talking to the kid and nothing is happening, well.....

Annie stop it or I'll say stop it again, and again and again

And then they think they talking has worked because the kid has stopped the tantrum some 15mins later, no the talking didn't work the kid most likely couldn't even hear the parent talking, the kid stopped because it got bored. So you're a parent with a lot of patience, whoop dee doo, you stand there like a prize plum with no control over your kid.

As is the topic of this thread, same situation, if that was me, my mam would've made sure I was looking at her and I would've got the line "what you crying for? shut up or I wil give yousomething to cry for.", that would genreally work, but if not, there was a smack incoming, and that wouild definitely work. Standing there for 15mins while I calmed down, I don't think so.
		
Click to expand...

Kids have tantrums thatâ€™s just the way kids are , a kid having a tantrum is not reason to smack them , that to me isnâ€™t great parenting to give them a smack to shut them up - what does that teach them ?


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Kids have tantrums thatâ€™s just the way kids are , a kid having a tantrum is not reason to smack them , that to me isnâ€™t great parenting to give them a smack to shut them up - what does that teach them ?
		
Click to expand...

It teaches them that if they act up in the same way again they will get smacked again, it is a deterent and it does work.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

Papas1982 said:



			Id suggest there are lots of kids who use up more of a teachers time and resources that donâ€™t have special needs. Also, the schools can get financial assistance for the extra help. If you mean that kids with special needs are simply using resources for teaching in general from national budgets for education then whatever school they go to wouldnâ€™t matter. Iâ€™d imagine a special school costs more to to run than mainstream. So maybe all kids should go to mainstream school and just absorb the costs there.

What alternative is there. Pre screen all births and any chance of a special need force abortion? Or donâ€™t educate them at all? Then spend how much basically looking after them? Iâ€™m biased in this chat as Iâ€™ve a daughter with mild cerebral palsy. She has an assistant, but if she went to one of the social schools she wouldnâ€™t be anywhere near as bright as she is now because the hopes at those school are more based on becoming a function member of society than one that may contribute once theyâ€™ve gone on to have a career.

IMO, your calling it a harsh decision is to put it mildly, very out of touch.
		
Click to expand...

OK, how do you think resource should be allocated?


----------



## Wolf (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Kids have tantrums thatâ€™s just the way kids are , a kid having a tantrum is not reason to smack them , that to me isnâ€™t great parenting to give them a smack to shut them up - what does that teach them ?
		
Click to expand...

Agree completely, all I can see that teaching them as they grow is to give someone a slap when they do something they don't like. 


Khamelion said:



			It teaches them that if they act up in the same way again they will get smacked again, it is a deterent and it does work.
		
Click to expand...

Tantrums happen with kids, it's up to the adult to show a way of rising above it and giving the children consequences or their actions in a more reasonable and responsible way, not resorting to a smack which is showing bad behaviour gets dealt with by using force.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			It teaches them that if they act up in the same way again they will get smacked again, it is a deterent and it does work.
		
Click to expand...

So what happens when they do it again ? A harder smack ?


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

TheDiablo said:



			And what 'results' are they exactly?
		
Click to expand...

Depends how tinted your rose spectacles are I guess.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

So taking the Tesco scenario, taking out of the supermarket and back home.

You've stood in Tesco's for 15mins talking softly to little Annie asking her repeatedly to stop her tantrum, you got no where read above for the rest, anyway later at home it's tea time and you've asked Annie to put her toys away, she doesn't want and has a tantrum, so you again use the same tactic and talk softly to her asking to behave and put her toys away, 15mins later the toys are still on the floor, her tea is getting cold, your tea is getting cold and you are no further forward. So you tell her leave you toys, come and get your tea before it gets cold. 

You finish you tea and you tell Annie go put your toys away, and she has a tantrum, she not going to do it, you have a stand off.

Do you :-

A - Stand there like a prize plum having a battle of wits against a child.
B - Agree a compromize and tell you will help tidy up if she puts things away, basically admitting deafeat.
C - Withold a valued item from her, her iPad, Mobile phone, stop her wathcing telly, probably only add fuel to the fire and then you have to carry out the threat.
D - Send her to the naughty step
E - Just give in as it easier, great she has you wrapped around her little finger and she knows she'll be able to get away with anything.
F - Tell her you're going to count to 3 and if she hasn't started putting stuff away she'll get a smack


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Oct 3, 2019)

Thereâ€™s some people on here that need a damn good spanking ðŸ‘


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So what happens when they do it again ? A harder smack ?
		
Click to expand...

I only write from my experience, but one smack was enough and then the threat of a potential smack was enough to bring me back into line.

Before you go off on the full scale abuse line, lets bring this back a little, we are talking about a smack, not a punch, or a kick.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Thereâ€™s some people on here that need a damn good spanking ðŸ‘
		
Click to expand...

Now now Phil, please keep to the subject of the thread. No need to go all 50 shades.


----------



## Papas1982 (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			OK, how do you think resource should be allocated?
		
Click to expand...

Quite simply it wouldnâ€™t be to write of a portion of the population simply based on the needs, efforts or costs required to educate them. 
There are plenty of able kids who drain finances. Generally kids need Câ€™s and above to go on to college. In a subject. We donâ€™t stop educating kids and wasting money once it becomes clear they may only ever get Dâ€™s. 

But for a start Iâ€™d merge schools. Special schools had there place years ago when letâ€™s be honest people with special needs were treated like 3rd rate citizens. Kids in general donâ€™t treat their piers like we did. Have separate schools and teachers imo wastes money. Have different departments yes. But many disabled kids will be able to learn well with the correct help, just like many able kids wonâ€™t pick up a subject no matter how â€œableâ€ they are.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

Wolf said:



			Agree completely, all I can see that teaching them as they grow is to give someone a slap when they do something they don't like.

Tantrums happen with kids, it's up to the adult to show a way of rising above it and giving the children consequences or their actions in a more reasonable and responsible way, not resorting to a smack which is showing bad behaviour gets dealt with by using force.
		
Click to expand...

You are dead right, it is up to the adult to rise above it, but how many times have you seen a kid in a melt down and the parent either just ignoring the situation hoping it'll stop soon, or as I've wrote just repeating stop it over and over, are either of those rising above it?


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Oct 3, 2019)

[QUOTE="Lord Tyrion, post: 2058604,A good teacher will control a class, no matter what the pupils are like. .[/QUOTE]

I have reduced your post for brevity 's sake.
You talk of sweeping statements!
What is this, if not that.

It is also a completely silly statement.Classic modern namby Pamby thinking, don't blame the poor little arsehole thug/kid: oh, no, blame the teacher.
It's your fault teacher.     -Utter crap thinking.

When kids could be disciplined, good ( most) teachers used to go to school thinking "how's the best way I can teach this subject today to the kids"

Today- how many good(most) teachers are going to school thinking
" Am I going to be able to keep control today"

You will deny this no doubt, but how many teachers are finishing early with stress?  
Because , I suspect , when they go to their head saying the class( or Johnny and his mates)  isn't behaving, how many are met with the reply or similar 
" Aren't you good enough to control your class then? Perhaps we should look at your ability, Etc 


The intelligent thug in today's class knows this and that there is no sanction to be made against him that *he *will find uncomfortable, so what's to stop him.

Too many good teachers have quit early, and most of us know why.

I have seen such attitudes in management to first line supervisors in other professions also. 
Much easier for the big boss to blame the little boss, rather than tackle the person causing the disruption or problem .
This is one of the major reasons that we have the society we have got now


----------



## TheDiablo (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Depends how tinted your rose spectacles are I guess.
		
Click to expand...

Not really, 'results' are a direct consequence or outcome from action(s). Black and white - no 'guessing'


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			It teaches them that if they act up in the same way again they will get smacked again, it is a deterent and it does work.
		
Click to expand...

Disgusting attitude


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			So taking the Tesco scenario, taking out of the supermarket and back home.

You've stood in Tesco's for 15mins talking softly to little Annie asking her repeatedly to stop her tantrum, you got no where read above for the rest, anyway later at home it's tea time and you've asked Annie to put her toys away, she doesn't want and has a tantrum, so you again use the same tactic and talk softly to her asking to behave and put her toys away, 15mins later the toys are still on the floor, her tea is getting cold, your tea is getting cold and you are no further forward. So you tell her leave you toys, come and get your tea before it gets cold.

You finish you tea and you tell Annie go put your toys away, and she has a tantrum, she not going to do it, you have a stand off.

Do you :-

A - Stand there like a prize plum having a battle of wits against a child.
B - Agree a compromize and tell you will help tidy up if she puts things away, basically admitting deafeat.
C - Withold a valued item from her, her iPad, Mobile phone, stop her wathcing telly, probably only add fuel to the fire and then you have to carry out the threat.
D - Send her to the naughty step
E - Just give in as it easier, great she has you wrapped around her little finger and she knows she'll be able to get away with anything.
F - Tell her you're going to count to 3 and if she hasn't started putting stuff away she'll get a smack
		
Click to expand...

We have had that situation and itâ€™s option B - we helped her tidy up her toys the first couple of times when she refused and now she does it herself , so to worked without the need of any threat and itâ€™s not â€œadmitting defeatâ€ itâ€™s part of teaching her to tidy up after herself



Khamelion said:



			I only write from my experience, but one smack was enough and then the threat of a potential smack was enough to bring me back into line.

Before you go off on the full scale abuse line, lets bring this back a little, we are talking about a smack, not a punch, or a kick.
		
Click to expand...

But for many people once is not enough and that second smack is a bit harder and then harder and the cycle continues until the child goes to school with bruises on them. Remove smacking and you lower the chances of child abuse starting


----------



## Wolf (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			You are dead right, it is up to the adult to rise above it, but how many times have you seen a kid in a melt down and the parent either just ignoring the situation hoping it'll stop soon, or as I've wrote just repeating stop it over and over, are either of those rising above it?
		
Click to expand...

And how do you know that kids hasn't been subsequently punished in some way at home afterwards instead of just smacking it in front of a load of strangers teaching them how to be humiliated in front of other people. 

Smacking is not the answer to problem it doesn't teach the kid a valuable lesson at all, all it does is make them fearful.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			Disgusting attitude
		
Click to expand...

Not really the operative word was and is deterent. The kid gets smacked once and as I wrote the kid then knows in future if they act up in the same way, there is the potential of a smack.

To smack once and use the thought as a deterent is direction of this covnersation that I am going, to smack a child repeatedly is not on and that is not what I am writing about.


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 3, 2019)

I am coming round to waterboarding. It isn't smacking, and heck, if it is ok by the good ol US of A, it must be fine.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But for many people once is not enough and that second smack is a bit harder and then harder and the cycle continues until the child goes to school with bruises on them. Remove smacking and you lower the chances of child abuse starting
		
Click to expand...

And for those people, then they should be punsihed, those who repeatedly hit their child, those who do leave bruises do need to know that physical abuse of that nature is not tolerated.

But again lets not take this down that road, the topic was smacking and my posts have been about my experience and a single smack and the deterent that it was.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Oct 3, 2019)

robinthehood said:



			Jersey and the isle of man ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ and some windswept islands in the South Atlantic.  
thats some empire
		
Click to expand...

Did the Empire strike back?


Couldnt help that one.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Oct 3, 2019)

Once again to prove a point people have taken it to extremes!

We have adults who are abusers that werenâ€™t smacked as kids.

We have kids who were smacked who are normal functioning adults.

Apart from the who determines what is a smack and how is it enforced? Iâ€™d be interested to know if more kids are damaged by their parents drinking and smoking in front of them in the home than by being smacked.

Finally, parenting is not easy and every family is different.


----------



## Backache (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			Do you :-

A - Stand there like a prize plum having a battle of wits against a child.
B - Agree a compromize and tell you will help tidy up if she puts things away, basically admitting deafeat.
C - Withold a valued item from her, her iPad, Mobile phone, stop her wathcing telly, probably only add fuel to the fire and then you have to carry out the threat.
D - Send her to the naughty step
E - Just give in as it easier, great she has you wrapped around her little finger and she knows she'll be able to get away with anything.
F - Tell her you're going to count to 3 and if she hasn't started putting stuff away she'll get a smack
		
Click to expand...

Have to say I went for C every time when our kids were young and it seemed to work, never had to smack.


----------



## andycap (Oct 3, 2019)

When i was at school the cane, or slipper for girls had finished (but we didn't know that ) and the threat or fear of it was enough of a deterrent , same as the uniform of a policeman , nowadays kids know they cannot be touched by anyone , parents included  and they use it big time ! behaviour of children ultimatley comes down to parenting . Yes i've smacked both of my daughters (not that i'm proud of it)  I wouldn't do it now but i grew up with it and it did me no harm , and my initial parenting skills were based on what i had learnt from my upbringing , all kids quickly learn to push boundaries , even as adults we need to have fear , if the punishment is not there for transgressions then some will just run riot with it . Justification ? perhaps not ! maybe smacking occurs whaen parenting skills fail .
 Perhaps it's a generation thing , but when i was a child if i got smacked i knew i deserved it .


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. They are a massive drain on the system as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.
		
Click to expand...

Wow.

I've tried to type a few replies to this but don't get very far without stopping with rage.

Point 1: Educate yourself on how funding for all children (including special needs children) in mainstream school works, additional funding is provided for those less fortunate.  "A drain on the system" is one of the most disgraceful/hurtful things I think I've ever heard my daughter described as

Point 2:  Educate yourself on the benefits (financial in terms of the state and otherwise) of early intervention.  Paying an additional Â£5k a year per pupil at school age can save millions in terms of benefits etc in later years.

So much in that post is offensive its worrying, have a word with yourself. 

On topic, was smacked as a kid, hated it.  Would never raise a hand to one of my kids.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

NWJocko said:



			Wow.

I've tried to type a few replies to this but don't get very far without stopping with rage.

Point 1: Educate yourself on how funding for all children (including special needs children) in mainstream school works, additional funding is provided for those less fortunate.  "A drain on the system" is one of the most disgraceful/hurtful things I think I've ever heard my daughter described as

Point 2:  Educate yourself on the benefits (financial in terms of the state and otherwise) of early intervention.  Paying an additional Â£5k a year per pupil at school age can save millions in terms of benefits etc in later years.

So much in that post is offensive its worrying, have a fucking word with yourself. 

On topic, was smacked as a kid, hated it.  Would never raise a hand to one of my kids.
		
Click to expand...

It's not offensive, it's a fact of life. There is X amount of money in the system to educate X amount of kids. Somebody (not me!) has to work out how to divvy it up. If one child takes up a larger chunk then it means less for another child, simple economics. I don't write the rules and I'm not saying what is right and what is wrong!


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			It's not offensive, it's a fact of life. There is X amount of money in the system to educate X amount of kids. Somebody (not me!) has to work out how to divvy it up. If one child takes up a larger chunk then it means less for another child, simple economics. I don't write the rules and I'm not saying what is right and what is wrong!
		
Click to expand...

You've just proven you've no idea of the current system tbh, stop embarrassing yourself now   Or educate yourself before commenting as I suggested 

I took our Education Authority to court and know, Â£ for Â£ how much they spent "fighting" us which was about 8 times the amount of money we asked for in the first place over the 6 years of a primary school education. 

I'm not disagreeing there isn't enough money in the system but until you really (and I mean *really*) understand how budgets are spent you are in no position to spout the uninformed and offensive rubbish you did earlier.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

NWJocko said:



			You've just proven you've no idea of the current system tbh, stop embarrassing yourself now   Or educate yourself before commenting as I suggested 

I took our Education Authority to court and know, Â£ for Â£ how much they spent "fighting" us which was about 8 times the amount of money we asked for in the first place over the 6 years of a primary school education. 

I'm not disagreeing there isn't enough money in the system but until you really (and I mean *really*) understand how budgets are spent you are in no position to spout the uninformed and offensive shite you did earlier.
		
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I do know how the system works. I understand that additional funding is provided to schools for special needs kids. But where do you think that money comes from? It doesn't just magically appear, it comes from government funding, just like the rest of the education budget.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

NWJocko said:



			OK I'll ask you a simple question

Do you think that the Â£140,000 spent by the Education Authority fighting our case would have been better spent:

a) spending Â£30,000 to support my daughter through primary school and having Â£110,000 left to invest elsewhere

or

b) spending all of that Â£140,000 fighting us and then conceding they had no case?

I'll leave it to you to work out where money is being wasted 

Click to expand...

Simple question and simple answer. A. 

I'm not defending how education authorities spend their money and for what it's worth, I wholeheartedly agree there are massive amounts of waste. I hear horror stories about it all the time from my G/F and it annoys me. 

I was just pointing out some basic economics and if it touched a nerve I apologise.


----------



## Khamelion (Oct 3, 2019)

pauldj42 said:



			Once again to prove a point people have taken it to extremes!

We have adults who are abusers that werenâ€™t smacked as kids.

We have kids who were smacked who are normal functioning adults.

Apart from the who determines what is a smack and how is it enforced? Iâ€™d be interested to know if more kids are damaged by their parents drinking and smoking in front of them in the home than by being smacked.

Finally, parenting is not easy and every family is different.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed a smack from a loving warm caring parent in a household that provides a stable loving environment could be construed as safe, as opposed to a smack from a drunken smoking layabout in household where swearing, alcohol and inappropriate behaviour around children is common place.

Is one then seen as just punishment for a childrens naughty behaviour and is the other seen as abuse?

Switch it around you have a household that provides everything a child needs but parents see the child as an obstruction or burden to their everyday life and the smack is a reminder to the child to be thankful for what they have, as opposed to a household where the parents don't have two pennies to rub together, but their child is everything and they would do anything for them, is a smack here a reminder to be careful with what they have?

Same question, Is one then seen as just punishment for a childrens naughty behaviour and is the other seen as abuse?


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			Simple question and simple answer. A.

I'm not defending how education authorities spend their money and for what it's worth, I wholeheartedly agree there are massive amounts of waste. I hear horror stories about it all the time from my G/F and it annoys me.

I was just pointing out some basic economics and if it touched a nerve I apologise.
		
Click to expand...

If you were pointing out "simple economics" I could understand and discuss, the waste of money in Education Authorites is appalling now I've had the misfortune to have to look into an understand it.

But you were pretty much promoting giving up on any kids who would't "achieve" academically and send them to a special school FFS!!

Only 1 example granted but if my daughter went to a "special school" at the age of 4 as you suggest, she'd be claiming Â£m's in benefits over her lifetime rather than being in the position to get a job and pay some tax back into the system which (hopefully) she will be after high school.


----------



## robinthehood (Oct 3, 2019)

Khamelion said:



			All well and good, but when you have a perfectly heathly able body and able mind child having a proper melt down tantrum in the middle tesco's and Mum or Dad is just saying talking to the kid and nothing is happening, well.....

Annie stop it or I'll say stop it again, and again and again

And then they think they talking has worked because the kid has stopped the tantrum some 15mins later, no the talking didn't work the kid most likely couldn't even hear the parent talking, the kid stopped because it got bored. So you're a parent with a lot of patience, whoop dee doo, you stand there like a prize plum with no control over your kid.

As is the topic of this thread, same situation, if that was me, my mam would've made sure I was looking at her and I would've got the line "what you crying for? shut up or I wil give yousomething to cry for.", that would genreally work, but if not, there was a smack incoming, and that wouild definitely work. Standing there for 15mins while I calmed down, I don't think so.
		
Click to expand...

My kids have had massive tantrums while out and about. No big deal, certainly never crossed my mind to hit them.  Usually they calmed down pretty quick when they realise I'm not interested.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 3, 2019)

NWJocko said:



			If you were pointing out "simple economics" I could understand and discuss, the waste of money in Education Authorites is appalling now I've had the misfortune to have to look into an understand it.

But you were pretty much promoting giving up on any kids who would't "achieve" academically and send them to a special school FFS!!

Only 1 example granted but if my daughter went to a "special school" at the age of 4 as you suggest, she'd be claiming Â£m's in benefits over her lifetime rather than being in the position to get a job and pay some tax back into the system which (hopefully) she will be after high school.
		
Click to expand...

No I never suggested sending kids to 'special schools' I just highlighted the percentage of special needs kids that go to them. I quoted a fact, it wasn't my opinion.


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 3, 2019)

drive4show said:



			No I never suggested sending kids to 'special schools' I just highlighted the percentage of special needs kids that go to them. I quoted a fact, it wasn't my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

Really? Not sure how to copy in but below is what you posted.

"Deprives normal kids"  "Majority suffer because of the minority"  "Drain on the system"

They aren't facts 




drive4show said:



			Approx 2% of special needs children go to 'special schools' the rest are integrated into normal schools. They are a massive drain on the system as the education system requires them to have allocated teaching assistants and all sorts of other requirements. This costs a huge amount of money and it deprives normal kids due to a lack of funds. Should the majority suffer because of the minority? Harsh decision to make but somebody has to make it.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Griffsters (Oct 4, 2019)

The way I have always looked at this issue is that if I had resorted to smacking, as an adult, I had ceased to be in the right. Counter productively, I would have just demonstrated to my daughter that hitting (violence) is an acceptable means to get my own way. That is not something I want her to think is acceptable, so why do it myself?

There are other ways to go about discipline IMHO.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Oct 4, 2019)

NWJocko said:



			Really? Not sure how to copy in but below is what you posted.

"Deprives normal kids"  "Majority suffer because of the minority"  "Drain on the system"

They aren't facts 

Click to expand...

OK, I hold my hands up. Poor choice of phrase on my part. Rather than 'drain on the system' I should have said something like 'need additional resources'. 
No offence intended and I apologise unreservedly ðŸ‘

On that note, I'm out on this thread.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 4, 2019)

Seemingly Scotland in Union are so against the SNP's smacking ban that they are organising bus trips for parents to take their children to Berwick for a thoroughly good thrashing.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 4, 2019)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Seemingly Scotland in Union are so against the SNP's smacking ban that they are organising bus trips for parents to take their children to Berwick for a thoroughly good thrashing.

Click to expand...

I'm trying to think whether that is Pythonesque or Blackadder but it made me smile either way . On a thread that at times has depressed me it brought a bit of levity to the proceedings


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Oct 4, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I'm trying to think whether that is Pythonesque or Blackadder but it made me smile either way . On a thread that at times has depressed me it brought a bit of brevity to the proceedings 

Click to expand...

Or maybe even a bit of levityðŸ˜€


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 4, 2019)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Or maybe even a bit of levityðŸ˜€
		
Click to expand...

Early morning, not had my cup of tea


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 4, 2019)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I'm trying to think whether that is Pythonesque or Blackadder but it made me smile either way . On a thread that at times has depressed me it brought a bit of levity to the proceedings 

Click to expand...

Neither it's on Wings.
Scotland in Union's answer to most things Scottish seems to involve bus trips to England.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 4, 2019)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Scotland in Union's answer to most things Scottish seems to involve bus trips to England.

Click to expand...

Ha ha. Good old Berwick


----------



## USER1999 (Oct 4, 2019)

Never mind the happy bus, it's the smacking bus for you. Could be a good deterrent! Behave, or it's the bus for you!


----------



## ColchesterFC (Oct 4, 2019)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Seemingly Scotland in Union are so against the SNP's smacking ban that they are organising bus trips for parents to take their children to Berwick for a thoroughly good thrashing.

Click to expand...

You need to look carefully at how the law is worded. If they have outlawed "smacking your children" then you simply have to take them round to your neighbour's house and let your neighbour smack them for you. Problem solved and the child gets disciplined.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 4, 2019)

I think it important that the Scottish Parliament has voted for this.  There is way too much serious and not that serious drunkenness and drunken behaviour in Scotland - it's almost endemic.  And when people are drunk their perception of right and wrong - reasonable and unreasonable behaviour - can go right out of the window.  And too many children will be smacked or beaten by drunken parents or 'friends'.  Anything that filters into a drunken and angry or frustrated brain that might cause an individual to pause - and then to not hit a child - or hit the child less - can only be the way forward.  That 'good' and 'decent' parents might think that a reasonable parental smack might end up with them having a criminal record is just how it should be.  The decent parent should also have reason to pause and think on their actions and possible consequences - both for themselves and in the longer term for the child.

That a parent is usually the closest adult to the child does not mean that the parent knows the way the child thinks - or what the child thinks on being hit or beaten.  Many children do not forget trauma in early life - and I base that on personal experience of the last 10yrs or so when I have heard many, many stories from adults reflecting upon how what happened to them in their childhood led them into serious difficulty and problems in teens and adulthood.

Differentiating between a light admonishing smack and a hit is never going to be possible retrospectively.  One rule for all is the only way to go.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Oct 4, 2019)

A smack? I had a knife to my throat after I punched my mother. 

Should of got more smacks!


----------



## Griffsters (Oct 4, 2019)

A Guide to Parenting by the Golf Monthly forum posse.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Oct 4, 2019)

Are we certain that this law is about not hitting kids? I'm sure that in Scotland "smacking" is another term for taking heroin. Maybe the new law is that they are no longer allowed to give their kids heroin north of the border.


----------



## Backache (Oct 4, 2019)

ColchesterFC said:



			Are we certain that this law is about not hitting kids? I'm sure that in Scotland "smacking" is another term for taking heroin. Maybe the new law is that they are no longer allowed to give their kids heroin north of the border.
		
Click to expand...

Don't be daft that would infringe human rights.


----------

