Sandra Paterson: Ban on smacking won't stop violence and abuse

I have two vague regrets about the kind of parent I have been over the past six years. The first is being too busy - too much time making a living, not sandcastles; too much time vacuuming the lounge floor instead of dancing on it.

The second regret is raising my voice, the occasions I have used a harsh tone when a firm one was all that was needed.

But I do not regret the times I gave her a quick smack on the bottom. It hasn't happened for quite some time because other methods of correction are generally more effective now she is older. Deny her dessert, for example, and you would think the world was coming to an end.

Last week, in fact, I told her that the consequence for her repeated disobedience was that she could not go to a friend's house for dinner.

"Could I have a smack instead?" she asked hopefully, clearly preferring a short, sharp consequence to one which affected her social life. I was pleased to see that the penalty I had chosen was probably the right one, given her obvious regret and that her behaviour has been better since.

When she was 2 or 3, however, a quick swat on the bottom, delivered calmly and followed with a hug, was sometimes the most effective solution.

There are few issues as controversial as whether to smack or not, and it is never out of the news for long. In the past fortnight a survey was released showing the use of smacking is declining, the Human Rights Commission announced plans to make it illegal some time in the next five years, and TVNZ's Marae featured the "smack-free town" campaign in Ngongotaha.

Both sides of the debate sincerely want the best for the child, and both sides are deeply concerned about the level of violence and abuse in society.

"Violence begets violence" is a phrase often used by anti-smacking groups and it is certainly true in that kids who are physically or sexually abused are more likely to treat their own children the same way.

But I do not agree that a controlled smack as used by thousands of decent, caring parents is violence or abuse. Violence is lashing out with excessive force on any part of the body, motivated by anger or some other volatile emotion. Abuse is sick and twisted and cruel beyond comprehension.

Smacking, on the other hand, done correctly, is carefully considered and motivated by love and commitment. I know many families with happy, gentle children where a smack will be given from time to time for dishonesty or disrespect, for example, or dangerous behaviour, such as running on to the road.

I also know many fantastic children whose parents do not use smacking. Consistency, clear boundaries and affection are obviously far more important than the parenting techniques one chooses. There are many effective ways to discipline and selecting which one should be influenced by the age and temperament of the child, the nature of the offence and the context of the situation.

People who abuse their children, however, do not think like that. And they are unlikely to refrain from bashing their kid over the head in a moment of anger just because a moderate and measured smack on the bottom becomes illegal, should the law be changed.

What does the research say about smacking? As usual it seems to depend on who is conducting it, but researchers agree it is impossible to separate accurately the effects of smacking from all other factors in a child's life.

But one thing the studies do reveal is a significant connection between child abuse and the breakdown of the family.

British data shows that compared to the intact married family, serious child abuse is 14 times more likely with single mothers, 20 times higher with a solo dad, and 33 times higher when a single mum has a live-in boyfriend.

As a solo mum, I could choose to be offended by those statistics, but they are simply the facts, so it follows that one of the best ways to lower child abuse would be to promote stable, committed, two-parent families.

Another way is by teaching parenting skills. Last year I went to a one-night Parenting Inc course on raising girls, along with more than 700 parents packed into a local school hall. I came away inspired and armed with new ideas.

The Ngongotaha smack-free campaign is using a popular programme called "The Incredible Years". It is this education, not the smack-free aspect, which could prove effective in lowering child abuse.

Something needs to start being effective because the number of children suffering in this country is appalling. Repealing the law which allows parents to smack is not the answer. There is no democratic mandate to do so: a Ministry of Justice poll showed 80 per cent of parents support retaining the right to smack and changing the law would effectively make criminals out of thousands of great parents.

Most importantly, however, a ban on ordinary parental smacking would not stop child abuse. And the Lillybings and Delcelias of this world deserve better.

* Sandra Paterson is a Mt Maunganui freelance journalist.