Skip to content 
Search

Latest Stories

Child smacking debate

Child smacking debate

FOR many who grew up in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, particularly in south Asian households, a smack on the bottom was a standard part of childhood discipline. For some, the violence was even worse and left lasting scars.

 But times change, and what was once considered a harmless correction is now under fierce debate. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) calls for a nationwide ban on smacking, arguing that current laws are ‘unjust and dangerously vague’. 


 The crux of the argument lies in the potential for harm. While a light smack might seem unharmful, the RCPCH argues that it is a form of abuse. Scientific evidence paints a bleak picture: abuse and neglect can traumatise children, impacting brain development and hindering their ability to interact with people and trust later in life. 

 Those early bonds with parents and carers must be built on affection and nurturing. Harsh discipline can disrupt this critical process, leaving the child feeling unloved and inadequate. 

 Worse yet, abuse is a form of trauma, and a stressor that can increase the risk of poor mental health, disease, and even early death. Children who experience physical punishment may struggle to regulate their emotions and behaviour, becoming trapped in a ‘fight or flight’ response.  

As adults, they may find it difficult to trust people or perceive innocent situations as threats. This is because the part of the brain responsible for survival takes over, which can result in aggressive or unhelpful responses to threats or stress.  

So, the question remains: should smacking be banned? The RCPCH believes a resounding yes is the answer. Children need protection, especially those who may not recognise abuse for what it is or understand their rights. Clear legislation would empower teachers, social workers, and other safeguarding professionals to identify signs of abuse and neglect more readily. This proactive approach would keep children safe and create a generation of healthier adults. 

 Opponents of a ban often argue that it undermines parental authority. They believe parents have the right to choose appropriate disciplinary measures. However, the RCPCH emphasises the distinction between reasonable discipline and corporal punishment. 

 Healthy discipline involves setting boundaries, explaining consequences, and guiding children towards positive behaviour. Smacking, on the other hand, relies on fear and humiliation, which can ultimately damage the parent-child relationship and the child’s self-worth.  

The debate around smacking is complex and steeped in cultural norms and personal experiences. However, the potential consequences of corporal punishment on a child’s well-being cannot be ignored. By prioritising a supportive, loving environment and positive connections, we can raise well-rounded, resilient children who thrive in the world. A nationwide ban on smacking might be the push needed to make that a reality. 

 Instagram: @itsmitamistry and @healingplacepod X: @MitaMistry 

More For You

The real challenge isn’t having more parties, but governing a divided nation

Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn

Getty Images

The real challenge isn’t having more parties, but governing a divided nation

It is a truth universally acknowledged that voters are dissatisfied with the political choices on offer - so must they be in want of new parties too? A proliferation of start-ups showed how tricky political match-making can be. Zarah Sultana took Jeremy Corbyn by surprise by announcing they will co-lead a new left party. Two of Nigel Farage’s exes announced separate political initiatives to challenge Reform from its right, with the leader of London’s Conservatives lending her voice to Rupert Lowe’s revival of the politics of repatriation.

Corbyn and Sultana are from different generations. He had been an MP for a decade by the time she was born. For Sultana’s allies, this intergenerational element is a core case for the joint leadership. But the communications clash suggests friction ahead. After his allies could not persuade Sultana to retract her announcement, Corbyn welcomed her decision to leave Labour, saying ‘negotiations continue’ over the structure and leadership of a new party. It will seek to link MPs elected as pro-Gaza independents with other strands of the left outside Labour.

Keep ReadingShow less
Amol Rajan confronts loss along the Ganges

Amol Rajan at Prayagraj

Amol Rajan confronts loss along the Ganges

ONE reason I watched the BBC documentary Amol Rajan Goes to the Ganges with particular interest was because I have been wondering what to do with the ashes of my uncle, who died in August last year. His funeral, like that of his wife, was half Christian and half Hindu, as he had wished. But he left no instructions about his ashes.

Sooner or later, this is a question that every Hindu family in the UK will have to face, since it has been more than half a century since the first generation of Indian immigrants began arriving in this country. Amol admits he found it difficult to cope with the loss of his father, who died aged 76 three years ago. His ashes were scattered in the Thames.

Keep ReadingShow less
One year on, Starmer still has no story — but plenty of regrets

Sir Keir Starmer

Getty Images

One year on, Starmer still has no story — but plenty of regrets

Do not expect any parties in Downing Street to celebrate the government’s first birthday on Friday (4). After a rocky year, prime minister Sir Keir Starmer had more than a few regrets when giving interviews about his first year in office.

He explained that he chose the wrong chief of staff. That his opening economic narrative was too gloomy. That choosing the winter fuel allowance as a symbol of fiscal responsibility backfired. Starmer ‘deeply regretted’ the speech he gave to launch his immigration white paper, from which only the phrase ‘island of strangers’ cut through. Can any previous political leader have been quite so self-critical of their own record in real time?

Keep ReadingShow less
starmer-bangladesh-migration
Sir Keir Starmer
Getty Images

Comment: Can Starmer turn Windrush promises into policy?

Anniversaries can catalyse action. The government appointed the first Windrush Commissioner last week, shortly before Windrush Day, this year marking the 77th anniversary of the ship’s arrival in Britain.

The Windrush generation came to Britain believing what the law said – that they were British subjects, with equal rights in the mother country. But they were to discover a different reality – not just in the 1950s, but in this century too. It is five years since Wendy Williams proposed this external oversight in her review of the lessons of the Windrush scandal. The delay has damaged confidence in the compensation scheme. Williams’ proposal had been for a broader Migrants Commissioner role, since the change needed in Home Office culture went beyond the treatment of the Windrush generation itself.

Keep ReadingShow less
Eye Spy: Top stories from the world of entertainment

Ed Sheeran and Arijit Singh

Eye Spy: Top stories from the world of entertainment

Ed Sheeran and Arijit Singh’s ‘Sapphire’ collaboration misses the mark

The song everyone is talking about this month is Sapphire – Ed Sheeran’s collaboration with Arijit Singh. But instead of a true duet, Arijit takes more of a backing role to the British pop superstar, which is a shame, considering he is the most followed artist on Spotify. The Indian superstar deserved a stronger presence on the otherwise catchy track. On the positive side, Sapphire may inspire more international artists to incorporate Indian elements into their music. But going forward, any major Indian names involved in global collaborations should insist on equal billing, rather than letting western stars ride on their popularity.

  Ed Sheeran and Arijit Singh

Keep ReadingShow less