Saying being smacked never did you any harm is a bit like grandstanding about your uncle who died in his 90s despite smoking 60 a day. You can't be sure about cause and effect and the evidence suggests it is unusual.
The findings of a new report on the physical punishment of children are hard to argue with. An accumulation of studies show consistent patterns and convincing evidence of, among other things, damage to children's psychological well-being in childhood and adulthood and a negative impact on future behaviour.
This has long been a controversial issue. It is a message many of us are reluctant to hear. We diminish this violence against children as 'more of a light tap', tie ourselves in knots with justifications.
Yet parents can and do hit their children in a way which would be assault were they to do it to another adult in the street. It is an indefensible double standard.
Already, many parents try to avoid physical punishment, which nearly always happens in moments of anger, of lost control. Hitting someone when you are angry is a lousy lesson to impart to children and most of us know it.
Some will warn that the state should not encroach on judgements about parenting. Criminalising parents is certainly no way to improve things for them or their children and a ban should be opposed if the goal were to prosecute parents.
But a prohibition on physical punishment should be largely symbolic, accompanied by education and awareness raising and reinforcing the existing direction of public opinion.
The UK is one of only five European states to still permit smacking. Other countries have shown changing the law need not lead to unnecessary prosecutions of parents.
Parenting is one of the most difficult jobs any of us will do. Outlawing smacking, if handled the right way, could make it easier, not harder.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here