world

NZ government to hold line in child smacking ban

17 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

17 Comments
Login to comment

Spare the rod and spoil the child.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Over pampered next generations will not work. They may be overpampered now,because of work put in by present generation parents.

What happens when present generation of working people start disappearing.

Next generation cannot live on pampering and being spoiled forever.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nice intent, but not sure it's really the right thing to do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sad that there needs to be a law to stop parents hitting their kids.

'Disciplining' a child by hitting it only teaches it that violence is justified if it helps you get your own way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From wikipedia: "A 2002 meta-analytic study that combined 60 years of research on corporal punishment, found that the only positive outcome of corporal punishment was immediate compliance; however, corporal punishment was associated with less long-term compliance. Corporal punishment was linked with nine other negative outcomes, including increased rates of aggression, delinquency, mental health problems, problems in relationships with their parents, and likelihood of being physically abused."

Basically there are less risky alternatives, and parents should learn to use them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, spanking is only for adults now in NZ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Too many laws is not such a great idea. What kind of parents like to hit their own children?It is the last resource which parents have to smack their own child for their own good. More law will just make the matter more complicated for the worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

cleo...spanking teaches children that there are consequences for inappropriate choices...There is a BIG difference between a spanking and violence. Studies like the one mentioned by SLM(sicklittlemonkey) are biased, and there are no duplicate studies to support the pseudo findings.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heck, my dad slapped me upside the head when I got out of line, and I turned out all right!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't believe in spanking, and I don't think it accomplishes anything positive; even any immediate compliance one gets from spanking a child cannot in any way be satisfying except to someone who is misdirecting personal anger and frustration, and perhaps even feelings of insecurity and inferiority.

But I agree that it's a shame it had to come to banning, and I think it's going to lead to all sorts of lawsuits or charges when it is not in fact a case of 'spanking', but of people misreading what occurs. For example, if my one year old kid starts reaching for something hot/sharp, or suddenly tries to bolt in front of a car, it might be a gut reaction to grab the child's hand or shoulder to keep them from doing the aforementioned. Someone not knowing the context might see it as a slap or throttling to punish or beat the child. True, the child might learn more from getting burned/cut or hit, but methinks those scars would be even deeper, painful, and even life-threatening. Of course, most responsible people wouldn't put those things in the kid's way, but kids will be kids and can find trouble however well you try and keep them from it.

I don't agree with this ban, basically, and it's probably an example like in Canada before they withdrew it (I think they did, anyway), where it was made mostly by people without children. Still don't agree with hitting kids, but I don't think there should be laws that will allow for unjust litigation, or they at the very least have to spell it out more clearly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone who needs to control children by hitting them is out of control themselves and should not have children at all. These are violent individuals who should never be trusted.

People who opposes this law should be banned from having children.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reminds me of an all to common thing I see nowadays. Some brat screaming his head off in the mall and his mom trying to talk him down and reason with the kid with the discussion normally ending with dear old mum placating the child with whatever he happens to need at that given point. When compared to what my mom would do to me if I pulled that crap, a sharp crack to the head and a low threat of "quiet or no dinner", would be my only reward.

I don't have kids...as far as I know, but it occures to me that parents should be able to raise their children in the way that they see fit within reason. No need to throw the frying pan at Joey but a swift throttling may be merited.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sharky1 - spanking teaches children that if you don't like what someone does, it's OK to cause them physical pain.

But let's leave aside the question of whether hitting children does them any lasting harm. What parent would want to hit their child, in view of the fact that the little perishers can be raised to be well-behaved, upstanding members of society without all the aggro?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lets use one of smiths examples. My daughter reaches for something hot that would burn her. My reaction, immediately reach out and stop her from grabbing it. I then smack her hand and tell her, no! What does that teach her? Am I now a bad parent for smacking my child? Should I have allowed her to be burned? Simply stop her from reaching for the object, and told her no, then been on hand to grab her hand the next dozen times while she continues to try to grab it?

You see there are cases where physical correction is needed, its not bad parenting, its in this case, association of fire/heat and pain. But without the pain being a permanent possible life time scar. Simply banning physical correction outright is definitely not the way to go.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir I agree. Slapping repeatedly to cause permanent marks on sensitive areas could be strewed as abuse but a crack on the hand or the buttocks never hurt me more than superficially and a bit of my pride. The sting and humiliation of a spank shamed me into changing my behavior. I don't hold any bad feelings toward my father for even taking a belt to my buttocks on occasions. Bad behavior that is not corrected with verbal warnings deserves to go to the next level to show that there are consequences to that bad behavior. Having it happen after a verbal warning shows that it was done in fairness and that laws do have a bite to them. This teaches the kids to respect rules and laws because there are bad consequences. Those totally against it are the cause of today's spoiled generations. The Liberal PC NZ government has gone too far with this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow bushlover, you seem to have it all worked out. Presumably you can cite references for your claims?

BTW, NZ has a conservative (National) government at the moment, and they aren't going to repeal the legislation. NZ has a serious problem with child abuse that these laws were created to help address.

The "next level" of correction that you mention doesn't have to be violence. Rewarding good behaviour, and time out (to calm down) or ignoring (which attention seeking children hate) for bad behaviour have been studied and found to work well with less risk to the child.

To all: Don't assume you "know" what's right because it's "obvious". The real world is often counter-intuitive.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

reference: common sense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites