With no intention of going off-topic but still trying to understand the mechanisms involved in this vote being at a Federal level and the passive-smoking one in 2012 being a failed initiative, it would appear that as there are no financial/business interests involved in a smacking ban, it can be passed easily with little resistance - apart from the SVP of course.
Putting aside the argument that a light smack done with the best intentions probably has few or no long-term negative affects and that passive smoking - especially around children can cause long-term, permanent damage, it makes little sense from a child-protection point of view to ban one, but not the other.
Delving into this deeper, a study was done after the failed passive smoking one and it looks like there were too many pro-smoking interests involved so it was bound to fail:
Anyway, I think itâs highly unlikely that anyone is going to create an initiative to reverse a law banning smacking of children so itâs here to stay.
Agree. This seems unnecessary in that physical violence (and forms of psychological violence also, I think) are already covered in crimimal law. As for civil cases, I would hope that courts are and remain able to differentiate between violent parents and parents who occasionally might get triggered into a âharmlessâ (I know, not the right word) physical reaction ⌠and probably feel bad for days about it.
The Scottish Government made it illegal to smack children about 5 years ago. The result is Scotland now has gangs of out of control kids (although this might also be something to do with kids being dragged up by drug addicted parents and single women having kids as it gets them lots of welfare benefits - Scotland has itâs own child payment system over and above standard UK Child Benefit, it pays out about an extra ÂŁ25 per week per child).
In the past few weeks my home in Fife has had 23 boys aged between 13 and 18 charged with serious assaults, one is charged with the attempted murder of a 15 year old in a local park frequented by walkers as itâs on the Fife Coastal Path. 4 boys aged 15 waiting at a bus stop were attacked by 19 teenagers aged 13 - 18, all were armed. 2 of the boys were seriously assaulted and need further surgery, one was stabbed in the back and shoulder with a broken bottle.
Added to that theyâve got kids chucking boulders off motorway flyovers and the menace of teenage offroad bikers in Fife churning up local beauty spots. Then there are assaults on teachers with female teachers saying boys are following Andrew Tate online.
This is what you get when kids arenât disciplined, it all started when Scotland banned corporal punishment in schools over 40 years ago after some stupid mother complained her wayward little teenage darling got the belt for something, citing he was such a lovely boy, he didnât deserve it and all that rubbish. If he was lovely he wouldnât have got the Lochgelly Tawse (a leather strap with 2 or 3 tails, in my day teachers used to soak it in something to harden the leather )
There has been an escalation since the Scottish Government introduced free travel for all under 22s about 3 years ago, they get passes for free bus travel and discounted train travel. It was supposed to be to help young people on low incomes to travel to college or minimum wage jobs and job interviews. Whilst itâs a great thing for those young people who are using it for that, it has unfortunately been hijacked by the ones who are hell bent on causing trouble (many are growing up in third generation families where nobody has ever worked, I can tell you of women I went to school with whose families are like that, it was easy to get the state to provide).
It hasnât been helped by the fact the criminal justice system in Scotland now recognises this theory that the adult brain doesnât fully develop until 25, so the Scottish Government says the under 25s shouldnât be jailed unless absolutely necessary. I honestly think you could get away with murdering your granny at the moment.
As Iâm back 4 times a year I see the mess the once thriving town centre has become, itâs worse with every visit and I never walk there after dark due to packs of kids vandalising whatâs left of it (also older people being assaulted by kids at the local bus station). Theyâve also had cannabis farms in the empty buildings, one was in a former bank. Thereâs a main police station about 5 mins from my house, but when the Scottish Government got rid of all the local police forces and renamed them Police Scotland they centralised everything in Fife into a building on an industrial estate in another town so you rarely see a police officer now.
As you can imagine Iâm in no rush to move back, the thought of it possibly being next spring is scary at the moment!
Have to admit the bit about the adult brain made me laugh. At 25 my brain was so undeveloped I had managed to move to London, get a job in a Japanese securities house, buy a 2 bed flat with a parking space and garage and get married. Where did I go wrong
I grew up with corporal punishment, it kept unruly kids especially teenagers in check. It is no fun sitting in a class when youâre serious about wanting to learn, but some kids are hell bent on disrupting the lesson. My husband went to a boys technical school in London where the cane was used.
I find the gangs of feral teenagers a worrying trend tbh. Scotland has as many problems with gangs of girls on that front. My house in Fife is walking distance of 2 absolutely beautiful parks and a Remembrance Garden but most of the older adults enjoying them of an evening leave just after 8pm because thatâs when the teens start arriving with alcohol and weed. Not long ago the poppy wreaths around the war monument were set light to because kids thought it was somehow a fun thing to do. When I was back in February the monument was all scorched
Corporal punishment was abandoned decades ago and is generally shunned since. That alone leaves no room for correlation with a development thatâs just a few years old.
I donât think physical âcorrectionâ would improve problematic behaviour. Maybe cutting off their access to social media would? (just a thought, I donât really believe such a drastic measure would do that either)
While youâll always have some troublesome members of society, the social media can amplify and glorify certain behaviours. (Iâve heard there are platforms on which they encourage each other to commit acts of vandalisms etc, really scary stuff)
I do wonder how did we survive without the need to hit old people or break windows or do whatever totally unacceptable stuff. Getting drunk or smoking without your parents knowing was the ultimate act of rebellion when I was a teen. (or having sex, if you were under 18)
I think physical punishment only makes sense for younger kids (way below social media age). By the time, they are old enough for social media, they should already be behaving well and/or can be reasoned with so that physical punishment is not necessary.
My son is 6 and I donât anticipate him requiring physical punishment any more. My daughter is 4 and being told to stand in the naughty corner was sufficient for her.
Iâm not sure this is the age group that would be âsmackedâ though. Usually if youâve got teens that are vandalising stuff either you have to ground them or, if itâs serious and the police are involved, then itâs kind of out of your hands anyway.
Younger kids tend to come in for the smack usually, it seems, for out of control or impulsive behaviour.
My dad was the one for a smack round the back of the legs but my mum never lashed out. Unsurprisingly, I was better behaved with my mum than my dad. For me, once an adult has exposed their own lack of control in that way they lose a lot of respect - but I stress that is just my own personal experience (not that I got smacked that often).
I donât believe you should smack kids in an out of controlled fashion. It should be very controlled and purposeful. Also, I donât think it is reasonable to smack kids for impulsive behaviour as they are still developing and donât really have good impulse control.
Exactly, theyâre too young to have control over their impulses at all times. Other than releasing some parental âtensionâ, thereâs no logical reason for âsmackingâ them. They have to learn, and you have to explain them over and over again. Some quiet time to reflect on their own behaviour could help.
I raised my voice to my children in some occasions, and I always, always regretted it for days.
I think for girls you can avoid it, but I believe for boys it is also an essential part of their education. The reality is that violence is a part of life for boys they should understand that their actions can escalate into violence and so develop an understanding of these dynamics and how to manage their actions appropriately.
I didnât say there was a correlation. I said there were the same trends all over Europe.
I was responding to you writing:
Social media definitely has a part in this with copycat incidences and the notoriety they gain from posting videos of incidents too.
Thereâs a certain amount of bravado too when the young offenders know they are quite likely to get away with it as no one dare stop them physically incase they are prosecuted themselves.
I donât quite agree with this, as you need to distinguish between ârough playâ and violence. Rough play is well meant, fun, and non-traumatic (altough accidents can happen).
Violence is next level: it is not fun for the ârecieverâ, and can be both physically and mentally scarring or traumatic.
Internet porn is also a contributor to adolenscent deviance.
)
