Scotland is to ban adults from hitting toddlers – and the rest of the UK may follow. Harassed mum Kate Figes considers the alternatives
Wednesday September 12, 2001
To smack or not to smack is fast becoming a question that will be decided by law rather than individual parents. Ten European countries have now outlawed physical punishment by parents and Scotland is set to follow suit next year with last week’s announcement that the Scottish parliament will make it illegal to hit or shake a child under three and to hit a child of any age on the head.
Whether such legislation will then be adopted by the rest of the UK remains moot. Opinion polls show a substantial majority of the public still wedded to the idea that dispensing a sharp blow to a misbehaving child is both an inalienable parental right and effective discipline. The government seems to share this common sense philosophy of “spare the rod and spoil the child”: Tony Blair and David Blunkett have both admitted smacking their children. But does smacking actually work? It may stop a child from misbehaving in the short term, but it also teaches them that it is acceptable to vent one’s anger through violence. And small children often forget why they were smacked in the first place.
“The research shows that coercive discipline generally is not effective,” says Mary Macleod of the National Family and Parenting Institute. “And that’s not just smacking. Humiliation or sarcasm, really aggressive looks, behaviours which relentlessly make children feel awful about themselves, are bound to be damaging.”
Children learn more by watching what their parents do, rather than listening to what they say. If there is a contradiction between parents’ words and their actions, children tend to imitate the latter. “It’s no good telling a child not to swear if you sprinkle your own sentences with four-letter words,” says child-rearing expert Penelope Leach, founder of one of the first campaign groups against smacking in 1988. “I once saw a man in a playground swing his four-year-old under his arm and hit his bottom as he said, ‘I will not have you hitting other children.’ I sat back in the sandpit and thought, ‘This is madness’.”
Parents may think they are coolly disciplining their child by smacking them, but most are simply expressing their own frustration. “Parents smack because they cannot control the emotions that children provoke in them, not because their behaviour is necessarily that bad,” observes psychologist Oliver James. “If you’re a parent being pushed to the limit by a tantruming toddler, you probably already know all the tricks. But in the end what solves it is not getting too worked up or upset by it – which is easy to say but hard to do.”
But if we agree that smacking should be outlawed – what then? What method of discipline, what sanctions are available to parents? “In the long term, it’s clear that for children to develop a good conscience and empathy, they need parents who use reason – explanations in terms that children can understand, and praise at all times for what they do well,” says Macleod. “Non-coercive punishments grounded within a loving relationship produce adults who are able to take responsibility themselves for doing right.” Smacking may be more instantly gratifying for the parent, but all the child learns is that you don’t want them to do something, not why it is wrong.
It may seem exhausting to have to explain constantly why it’s better to share toys, not to snatch, and to sit on a chair at meal times, but with regular discussion of rules and the reasons for them, you will encourage psychological maturity and foster understanding of the need for social co-operation. You are also raising children who are more likely to be able to control their own tempers and set their own goals with better self-discipline.
“Positive disciplines include giving ‘time outs’, reasoning and distraction,” says Dr Alex Cutting, lecturer in developmental psychology at the University of Reading. “But the most important thing is to catch your child being good rather than naughty. The behaviour that you pay attention to increases. Treat bad behaviour with calm disdain. Don’t smack them for running out into the traffic, use the situation to teach them what they should have done instead. Then praise the child the next time they stop at the edge of the pavement.”
When a family relationship is based on what is known by psychologists as the “authoritative model”, where there are rules but where these rules are explained and discussed within a loving environment, parents have a far stronger hand when it comes to discipline. “The main sanction a parent has is love,” says Oliver James. “When a child feels loved, with parents who are clearly interested and nice to them, they will feel guilt when they obviously transgress something that you regard as important because you become angry and assertive.
“If the relationship is strong, then guilt will modify their behaviour. They won’t need external force. Just a look or giving them the feeling that they are hurting or upsetting you will be sufficient. There’s nothing wrong with a bout of guilt and shame. They are both foundations of depression in later life, but in small doses they can play a very healthy role in helping people to restrain their behaviour.”
“It’s not rocket science,” advises Mary Macleod. “If it’s a toddler throwing a tantrum, then ignoring it is a good first response because they are trying to get your attention. If they are fighting over a toy, remove the toy. Separate the child from the problem.”
Psychologist Terri Apter believes that it helps if the punishment in some way fits the crime, establishing a chain of consequence: “If the child has made a mess or broken something, then they can help to clear up or repair the damage. If they have hurt someone, they should apologise and then be encouraged to play positively with that sibling or friend. The point of punishment should be that the child is able to learn in a better way, rather than just that something awful will happen to them.”
Penelope Leach doesn’t believe that relationships with small children should be based on the principle of punishment and reward: “But if I’ve got to recommend sanctions, then the so-called sitting punishments such as ‘time out’ or sending them to their bedroom are the best. If a five-year-old is really misbehaving at supper time, then I might send her away from the table until she can come back and not ruin it for everyone else.
“One of the huge dangers of wanting to be child-centred,” she says, “is that we talk and talk and they don’t hear us and it drives everyone demented. There really is a huge case for saying, ‘It’s bathtime’ twice and then, if they don’t go, pick them up and take them there, walking them through it on the third call. You don’t have to be nasty, just in charge.”
The “time out” concept attempts to discipline children by isolating them in another room. It can be useful for both parent and child when tempers are frayed, and just a few minutes apart helps everyone calm down enough to be able to talk about things sensibly.
One of the drawbacks to trying to bring up children in a more humane and child-centred way is that it is more challenging to modify their behaviour. The reasons for rules often have to be repeated over and over, and it can be exhausting. But if the object is to raise considerate children who know the difference between right and wrong from an early age, then it’s worth putting in this extra effort – using reason, communication and love – rather than fear of force.
What do I do? Well, there is one other tool in a parent’s (non-violent) arsenal for conveying the message that a line is close to being crossed: humour. When my children are driving me to the brink, I say, “If you don’t stop that now, I’ll cancel Christmas.” That usually works.